Rental Agreements: Former Landlord Won't Offer Refund Because We Weren't Rent-Controlled

My question involves landlord-tenant law in the State of: California

So a little background: Our former complex in Los Angeles has 180 units, 170 of which are rent-controlled. Were were in one of the 10 units that was not rent-controlled. In January, the condominium association we shared the pool with decided that we would no longer have access to the pool, spa, tennis courts, and bbq area. All of those things are specifically listed in our lease.

People complained to the LA Housing Department, and the complex was served with letters saying they were required to reduce the rent for "loss of housing services and recreational facilities". So, the apartment complex sent a letter to the residents, detailing how they will pay a refund of $705.00 for the previous 6-months, and reduce rent by $65.00 going forward. They told us that we are not eligible since we are not rent-controlled, and the Housing Department said they can't help us because we moved out July 31st (the retroactive refund was for January 16-July 16, so we were there the entire time).

Is that legal? Our lease includes access to the pool, spa, tennis courts, and bbq area, and we were not given any sort of notice (30 days or otherwise) that we would no longer have access to those things. Should we be allowed to get the refund since we were paying for things in our lease that were no longer offered, and the apartment complex admitted a "loss of...services" in their letter to residents?

Do we have any case in small claims court?

Thanks!