LOS ANGELES — A City Council committee Wednesday rejected a proposal to implement a rent-hike moratorium for one year, but advanced plans to prohibit certain evictions for victims of January's fires who lost their homes or livelihoods.

The Housing and Homeless Committee voted 4-0 to amend a proposal introduced by City Council members Eunisses Hernandez, Hugo Soto-Martinez and Adrin Nazarian, which originally intended to bar certain types of evictions for impacted fire victims and implement a rent-hike moratorium through Jan. 31, 2026, for all apartments in the city.

Councilman Curren Price, a member of the committee, was absent.

Last week, the original motion had been sent back to committee on a 10- 3 vote following a heated debate that left several members concerned about the unintended consequences of such protections. The council's action also came after nearly four hours of public comment in which landlords criticized the protections while tenants and housing advocates urged for an immediate pause on rent increases.

Prior to the committee's discussion, Hernandez explained her proposal, which she said would establish an eviction defense while impacted residents can regain their footing.

"Our motion creates a safety net for laborers who earn their livelihoods as gardeners, domestic workers, caretakers and employees of small brick-and-mortar businesses, and owners of these businesses in communities like Palisades and Altadena, who now find themselves out of work and with nowhere to turn to," Hernandez said.

Hernandez argued that an eviction defense is not an excuse for tenants not to pay their rent.

Committee members ultimately axed the proposed rent-hike moratorium. They also clarified a list intended to bar certain evictions — leaving protections for non-payment of rent and no-fault other than a government order to vacate.

Additionally, the original proposal allowed individuals to self-attest under perjury that they were impacted by the January fires. However committee members required residents provide documentation of economic hardship.

The committee advanced an amendment that would direct the creation of a relief fund for mom-and-pop landlords as well.

Meanwhile, Councilman Bob Blumenfield, who sits on the committee, introduced amendments that failed to pass on 2-2 votes, including seeking further clarification as to how landlords could potentially use the Ellis Act to evict tenants impacted by the fires.

Blumenfield and Nazarian also had the idea of barring landlords from evicting fire-impacted tenants who had three months worth of back rent to pay. That failed in a 2-2 vote, though their colleagues expressed interest in following up on that measure.

The committee also expressed interest in possibly tapping into Measure ULA funding to provide rental assistance for tenants impacted by the fires. City staff is expected to report on the feasibility of doing so, and verifying whether it can be allowed under the terms voters approved in 2022.

The amended proposal will be further discussed and voted on at a future City Council meeting.

Councilwoman Nithya Raman, chair of the committee, allowed 45 minutes of public comment.

Landlords once again filled the room to voice their concerns and criticize the proposal.

Rickson Galvez, an attorney with the Pasadena-based firm Lagerlof, LLP, urged the committee to reconsider the proposed eviction moratorium though he appreciated the requirement for tenants to verify loss of income due to the fires.

"This policy still creates significant and unfair burdens on housing providers, particularly small landlords," Galvez said. "Even with the proposed rental assistance program for mom-and-pop landlords, the eviction moratorium unfairly forces housing providers to absorb financial loses and places their livelihoods at risk..."

Representatives for Valley Industry & Commerce Association, Apartment Owners Association, and the California Apartment Association criticized the original proposal.

Matt Buck, vice president, local public affairs for the California Apartment Association, argued that direct rental assistance would be the best method to help impacted individuals who lost their jobs.

Daniel Jimenez, a tenant, reprimanded landlords who were against the protections.

"Why do they (landlords) think it is a bad idea? All I hear is `profit, profit, profit, and more profit,"' Jimenez said.

"The LA housing rental market is pretty expensive. I can't afford to live in Los Angeles, and if I can't afford to live in LA with a stable job, imagine those that are being impacted the fires."

Priscilla Castaneda, a community organizer with InnerCity Struggle, which describes itself as "a transformational and intergenerational movement that builds community power to advance justice, life opportunities and dignity in the Eastside of Los Angeles, said people need support. She urged the committee to approve a temporary pause on rent increases.

"This should have already been implemented — a reminder that freezing rent (increases) is morally and ethically important," Castaneda said.

On Tuesday, the City Council approved a proposed ordinance to prevent evictions of tenants who welcomed unauthorized occupants and pets, who were displaced as a result of the January fires for one year. The proposal also disallowed rent increases related to those additional occupants in a unit.