Most property managers know the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) as California’s workplace discrimination law. But fewer realize that the same statute also governs housing, and it does so with a level of detail that goes beyond federal law. California Government Code §12955 et seq. makes clear that discrimination in renting, selling, or financing housing is not only a violation of ethics, but also a violation of state law.

How FEHA Applies to Housing

FEHA’s housing provisions mirror the intent of the federal Fair Housing Act: to ensure that no one is denied housing opportunities based on who they are. Under §12955, it is unlawful to refuse to rent, impose different terms, or harass tenants on the basis of protected categories such as:

• Race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, and ancestry

• Familial status (such as households with children)

• Marital status

• Source of income, including housing vouchers

• Disability or medical condition

• Age and genetic information

For property managers, this means that the seemingly small decisions, like advertising a “no children” policy, refusing to accept Section 8, or failing to accommodate a tenant with a service animal, can amount to a violation of state law.

Reasonable Accommodations and Modifications

One of the most significant applications of FEHA is for tenants with disabilities. Landlords must provide reasonable accommodations in rules or policies (for example, allowing an emotional support animal in a “no pets” building). They must also permit reasonable physical modifications to a unit, such as grab bars in a bathroom, when necessary for the tenant’s use and enjoyment of the property.

Comparing FEHA with the Federal Fair Housing Act

At first glance, FEHA and the federal Fair Housing Act cover much of the same ground. Both prohibit housing discrimination and protect against retaliation. However, there are key differences property managers should be aware of:

• Broader Protected Categories: FEHA extends beyond federal protections by including marital status, sexual orientation, source of income, age, and genetic information.

• Procedural Differences: While federal claims are investigated by HUD, California complaints are handled by the Civil Rights Department (CRD). Tenants can file directly with CRD, which often provides a faster and more accessible path to resolution.

• Stronger Remedies: FEHA allows for broader damages, including emotional distress, punitive damages, and civil penalties, making the risks of noncompliance more significant.

Practical Implications for Housing Providers

For landlords and property managers, FEHA’s reach means compliance cannot be a “check-the-box” exercise. It requires actively reviewing policies, training staff, and updating lease agreements to reflect California-specific protections. Common areas of risk include:

• Blanket bans on applicants using housing subsidies

• Advertising language that suggests a preference for certain household types

• Failure to act when tenants report harassment based on a protected category

The Takeaway

California Government Code §12955 et seq. transforms the Fair Employment and Housing Act into a powerful housing law. By expanding protected categories and strengthening remedies, FEHA makes compliance both a legal requirement and a business necessity. Property managers who understand these distinctions, and align their practices accordingly, are better positioned to avoid liability while creating fair, inclusive housing communities.