A Major Step Forward in Santa Barbara Tenant-Landlord Conflict

After nearly two years of conflict between tenants of a West Beach apartment complex and their landlords, and following a quick two-day trial in court, the parties agreed to a settlement that marks a “decisive step forward” in the long-running dispute over the aging property, according to a statement released by attorneys representing the property owners.

Technically, the deal covers three tenants remaining in one of the three buildings at 215 Bath Street, a 52-unit complex purchased by business partners Austin Herlihy, Chris Parker, and James Knapp in the summer of 2023. A day after the owners took over, they served termination notices to tenants that sparked a community-wide debate over “renovictions.”

Property owners argued that the buildings were in dire need of upgrades, while tenants argued that the notices were illegal and banded together to fight for their right to stay with the help of advocates with the Santa Barbara Tenants Union and attorneys with the Legal Aid Foundation of Santa Barbara County. Over the past two years, the property became a spark point in the community discourse over evictions and tenants’ rights, playing a part in the city’s updated eviction ordinance and the election of a more tenant-friendly city council.

Many of the original tenants left earlier in the process, taking varying relocation sums. When tenants and the landlords nearly reached an agreement in August 2024, criminal charges brought by the city against Knapp and civil lawsuits on both sides made matters even more complicated.

Tenants declared a rent strike in January 2025, and by April the criminal case against Knapp was diverted, with Santa Barbara Superior Court Judge Raimundo Montes de Oca ruling that Knapp needed to “follow the law like everybody else.” If Knapp breaks any of the conditions of the court diversion, criminal charges could be brought back.

One of the buildings at 215 Bath has been occupied by international students from EF International Language Campus, which created another set of problems with the remaining tenants, several of whom had negotiated new lease agreements allowing them to stay at the property. EF representatives did not address the tenant-landlord conflict specifically, but said they would be officially ending their group lease next month.

The most recent court battle involved the landlords and three of the remaining tenants who had not been able to negotiate a new lease agreement. According to the landlord’s attorney Lacy Taylor, the tenants had refused several previous offers with larger relocation sums; according to the tenants’ Legal Aid attorney Megan Grindstaff, the landlords had refused to accept the tenants’ rent for over a year.

Taylor said the landlords had built their case on the “urgent need for substantial repairs” to the property, with much of their evidence drawing on structural deficiencies, unsafe living conditions, and knob-and-tube electrical that made continued occupancy untenable. Tenants’ lawyers argued that repairs could have been done without needing to displace anybody.

“This outcome affirms our client’s right to maintain and improve their property in accordance with city regulations and safety standards,” said Taylor. “We’re pleased that the tenants have finally agreed to a reasonable resolution.”

As part of the settlement, which was approved by Judge Donna Geck on Monday, the three tenants agreed to move out of the property within 60 days. The tenants do not have to pay for the accrued back rent — between 12 to 14 months’ worth of rent — and each will receive a relocation assistance sum as required by law.

Grindstaff, the tenants’ attorney with Legal Aid, said her clients appreciated the opportunity to testify in front of a jury and that the tenants accepted an offer that provided “the best terms offered to date.”

Herlihy, one of the property owners, said the case served as an early test of Santa Barbara’s updated ordinance relating to renovation-related evictions, potentially “setting a precedent for future property owners facing similar challenges.”

The tenants’ attorneys, however, pushed back on the idea, saying the cases “were neither a referendum on city ordinances nor a contest on a ‘right’ to repair buildings.”

“The tenants refuse to accept that deferred, routine maintenance has ever formed a ‘just’ basis for doubling rents,” Grindstaff said, “and they hope that the community they built inspires others who seek to repair the broken system they confronted.”

She considered it a positive that multiple long-term tenants — including retirees and working-class families — are remaining in each of the three buildings. The owners have assured the remaining tenants that their apartments will no longer be included in the substantial remodel. “If ownership reneges on this commitment, then conflict will continue,” Grindstaff said.

The property owners are looking forward to continuing with renovation work on the property: “With the settlement finalized, the landlord can now move forward with long-overdue renovations that will enhance the safety, value, and livability of 215 Bath Street,” Taylor said.