body,date,page,text,path
OpenGovernmentCommission,2018-10-01,1,"MINUTES OF THE OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY
OCTOBER 1, 2018 - - 7:00 P.M.
Chair Dieter convened the meeting at 7:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL -
Present:
Commissioners Henneberry, Little, and Chair Dieter -
3.
[Note: Commissioner Little was present via teleconference from 321 17th Street,
Denver, CO 80202]
Absent:
Commissioners Foreman and Schwartz - 2.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA
None.
AGENDA ITEMS
3-A. Select Chair and Vice Chair
Commissioner Henneberry moved approval of Commissioner Little serving as Chair.
Chair Dieter seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:
Commissioner Henneberry: Aye; Commissioner Little: Aye; Chair Dieter: Aye; Ayes: 3.
[Absent: Commissioners Foreman and Schwartz - 2.]
Chair Dieter moved approval of Commissioner Henneberry serving as Vice Chair.
Commissioner Little seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:
Commissioner Henneberry: Aye; Commissioner Little: Aye; Chair Dieter: Aye; Ayes: 3.
[Absent: Commissioners Foreman and Schwartz - 2.]
3-B. Minutes of the February 5, 2018 and March 5, 2018 Meetings
Chair Dieter moved approval of the February 5, 2018 minutes.
Commissioner Henneberry seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call
vote: Commissioner Henneberry: Aye; Commissioner Little: Aye; Chair Dieter: Aye;
Ayes: 3. [Absent: Commissioners Foreman and Schwartz - 2.]
Chair Dieter moved approval of the March 5, 2018 minutes.
Commissioner Henneberry seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call
vote: Commissioner Henneberry: Aye; Commissioner Little: Aye; Chair Dieter: Aye;
Ayes: 3. [Absent: Commissioners Foreman and Schwartz - 2.]
Meeting of the
Open Government Commission
1
October 1, 2018",OpenGovernmentCommission/2018-10-01.pdf
OpenGovernmentCommission,2018-10-01,2,"3-C. Accept the Annual Report
Commissioner Henneberry moved approval of accepting the annual report.
Commissioner Little seconded the motion, which carried by the following roll call vote:
Commissioner Henneberry: Aye; Commissioner Little: Aye; Chair Dieter: Aye; Ayes: 3.
[Absent: Commissioners Foreman and Schwartz - 2.]
COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS
Chair Dieter stated that she wanted to follow up on two items after rereading the
minutes: 1) changing the City Council webpage to let the public know to copy the City
Clerk on meeting correspondence they want it published; 2) adding an asterisk for
deviating records retentions timeframes; she does not feel super strongly about it, but
thought it might be helpful for items that are not clear; gave a report on the City Council
adopting most of the Commission's suggestions on the Rules of Order; outlined
changes, including Council giving themselves nine minutes and cutting comment time to
two minutes for matters with seven or more speakers; she and Commissioner Little sent
a letter to Council, which was included in the record; the Council also decided to end
meetings at 11:00 p.m.
Commissioner Little expressed concern over Council reducing the time for speakers;
stated that she disagrees with automatically reducing the time.
Chair Dieter stated that she was dissatisfied that matters in the letter were not included;
using Rosenberg's Rules of Order is turning out to be a really good thing.
Commissioner Little inquired whether the recommendations seem to be working and
whether there has been training and education.
The City Clerk responded a nine minute timer for Council has been implemented; the
Mayor explains the time limit to the public when the speaker threshold is reached so
that they are aware before speaking; the Council has voted to suspend the rules and
hear additional items past 11:00 p.m. a couple of times.
Chair Dieter stated the two things she has noticed is the Chair needs to ask for a motion
right away once public comment is closed and three motions can be on the table at a
time.
Commissioner Henneberry stated that he attended a meeting; most of the
recommendations were implemented and seemed to make the meeting run much
smoother; he does not like that Council increased their time to nine minutes; speakers
can fit a lot into two minutes, which could work for all public comment.
Meeting of the
Open Government Commission
October 1, 2018
2",OpenGovernmentCommission/2018-10-01.pdf
OpenGovernmentCommission,2018-10-01,3,"Commissioner Little noted seven speakers with three minutes totals 21 minutes and
eight speakers with two minutes totals 16 minutes; two minutes should suffice when
there are many speakers, but it seems like a limitation on the public's ability to
comment.
Chair Dieter stated Councilmember Matarrese suggested trying it out and changes can
be made if needed; encouraged the Commission and members of the public to contact
the City Council or Commission if something should be changed.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chair Dieter adjourned the meeting at 7:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lara Weisiger
City Clerk
The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.
Meeting of the
Open Government Commission
3
October 1, 2018",OpenGovernmentCommission/2018-10-01.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-10-01,1,"Approved Minutes
October 1, 2018
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Rent Review Advisory Committee
Monday, October 1, 2018
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 6:32 p.m.
Present were:
Vice Chair Murray; Members Griffiths and Sullivan-Cheah
Absent:
Chair Cambra
Program staff:
Grant Eshoo, Gregory Kats
City Attorney staff: John Le
2. AGENDA CHANGES
a. Program staff announced that changes would be shared with the Committee as
each agenda item was called.
3. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
a. Program staff announced that the RRAC was looking to recruit a new member and
encouraged the Committee members and public to contact staff for more
information or send interested parties to staff to learn how to apply.
a. Following up on Chair Cambra's request at the August 6, 2018 meeting to provide
information on the resolutions of cases that are published on meeting agendas but
resolve prior to the Committee hearing them, Staff referenced the July 2018 report
that had been provided to the Committee at the September 6, 2018 hearing
(attachment to Agenda Item 7-K). Staff informed the Committee that details of
any cases that resolved prior to RRAC review could be found in the Rent
Stabilization Program's monthly reports, which are published monthly on the
Program's website, www.alamedarentprogram.org
4. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA ITEMS, NO.1
a. Alameda Renters Coalition (ARC) member Eric Strimling commented that landlords
should adopt and implement good business plans to account for expenses, which
would help preclude their needing to request large, sudden rent increases.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. None.
6. UNFINSHED BUSINESS
6-A. CASE 1078 - 2485 Shoreline Dr., Apt. 202
No Committee review. The tenant was not present at the hearing. The rent increase will
go into effect as noticed.
Page 1 of 7",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-10-01.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-10-01,2,"Approved Minutes
October 1, 2018
6-B. CASE 1084 - 2485 Shoreline Dr., Apt. 204
Tenant: Yolande Perry
Landlords: Randall Kessler, Andrew Fisher, Asia Hawkins
Proposed rent increase: $290.85 (20.4%), effective October 1, 2018
Mr. Kessler asked if there was a quorum of Committee members and how many votes
would be needed in order for a motion to carry. The Committee and City Attorney staff
informed the parties that three members made a quorum and that all three members
present would have to vote the same way for any motion to pass.
Mr. Fisher told the Committee that the landlords will have spent a total of $5.5 million
dollars in work that went into fixing, maintaining, and improving the building, including
financing and losses. He said that management came to the rent increase amounts they
did after evaluating how to fairly spread the costs out to the tenants without imposing
financial hardships.
Ms. Perry said that the increase request posed a financial hardship for her. She said
that she was paying into a mandatory retirement plan at work, although she would
never be able to retire, and also had increased medical expenses. She said she could
afford an increase of $75 to $85. She said there was a laundry room next door to her
unit that made noise in her unit late into the night.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked her if she received a rent abatement during the
construction and she said had not, but they gave her a $100 rent abatement for use of
a parking space that she did not use for four months. Ms. Perry said she would like a
new carpet and new kitchen appliances.
Member Griffiths asked her what a $135 increase would mean for her, and Ms. Perry
said she did not think she could afford her health plan if her rent were increased that
much.
Vice Chair Murray asked what she did for work, and Ms. Perry said she was a case
manager working for the State of California. Vice Chair Murray asked if she received pay
increases at work, and Ms. Perry said she did, but the increases were already allocated
to paying other increased expenses.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked Ms. Hawkins how much this type of unit rents for at
market rate and she said she had recently rented a comparable unit for $2,395 per
month. Member Sullivan-Cheah asked Ms. Perry if she used the parking spot that came
with her unit and she said she did not.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked if management would be interested in asking for less of
an increase if Ms. Perry gave up her parking spot so that management could rent it to
Page 2 of 7",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-10-01.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-10-01,3,"Approved Minutes
October 1, 2018
another tenant. The landlords discussed this and said they would consider it, but would
have to talk to the property managers at Berger Enterprises to ascertain the exact value
of the parking space.
The parties returned to their seats and the Committee began deliberations.
Member Griffiths made a motion for $75 increase, for which there was no second.
Member Sullivan-Cheah said he believed Ms. Perry had expressed a financial hardship.
He said he believed an $85 increase (parking space aside) was fair considering the
landlords had demonstrated that they put a significant amount of work into the
property.
Motion and second for an $80 monthly rent increase (Members Griffiths and Sullivan-
Cheah). Motion passed 3-0.
6-C. CASE 1092 - 2485 Shoreline Dr., Apt. 219
No Committee review. Prior to the hearing, the parties reached an agreement concerning
the amount of the rent increase. Details of the agreement can be found in the Rent
Stabilization Program's monthly report at www.alamedarentprograms.org
6-D. CASE 1097 - 2485 Shoreline Dr., Apt. 213
No Committee review. The tenant was not present at the hearing. The rent increase will
go into effect as noticed.
6-E. CASE 1103 - 2485 Shoreline Dr., Apt. 102
Tenant: Christopher Wooten
Landlords: Randall Kessler, Andrew Fisher, Asia Hawkins
Proposed rent increase: $310.83 (24.0%), effective October 1, 2018
Ms. Hawkins said that management had been working on attending to the issues Mr.
Wooten raised in his submitted response to the Committee, such as remediating any
mold in the unit, and repainting the walls. Mr. Fisher pointed out that although no
improvements were made to the inside of the unit, all tenants benefit from the work
that was done to the property, which is why the increases were being spread somewhat
evenly to most or all of the tenants at the property. Ms. Hawkins passed around a
picture of the work that had been done to improve Mr. Wooten's kitchen cabinets.
Mr. Wooten said that he had two kids in school in Alameda and if the rent increased too
much they would have to relocate outside Alameda, uprooting their children, which
could be very hard on them. He said he works as a case manager in the mental health
field, and had experienced a decrease in income, which has made him look into
Page 3 of 7",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-10-01.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-10-01,4,"Approved Minutes
October 1, 2018
changing careers, which could come with its own increased costs (e.g., paying for
additional education). He said his wife was working full-time and was also in school.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr. Wooten what percentage of his income the rent,
after the requested increases, would represent. Mr. Wooten said that the requested
increase of $310 would make the rent payment come out to about 40% of their
household income. He said that he and his wife were paying for their education through
their savings.
Vice Chair Murray asked what his wife did and he said she was an assistant teacher at a
Montessori school. She asked the ages of his kids and he said they were 11 and 13
years old. Vice Chair Murray asked what he thought a reasonable rent increase would
be, and, referencing his paperwork, pointed out that he had indicated in his submission
that he thought an increase of $105 would be reasonable. Mr. Wooten confirmed he
thought that amount was reasonable. Vice Chair Murray asked if he could afford the full
increase requested by landlords for one year, $123.03, and he said he would have to
start sacrificing things, like programs for his kids.
The parties took their seats and the Committee began deliberations.
Member Sullivan-Cheah said he thought the $105 offered by the tenant was reasonable.
Vice Chair Murray added that it represents more than the CAPX costs of $81.33, and so
it included some increased operating costs.
Motion and second for a $105 increase (Members Sullivan-Cheah and Griffiths). Motion
passed 3-0.
6-F. CASE 1105 - 2485 Shoreline Dr., Apt. 218
No Committee review. Prior to the hearing, the parties reached an agreement concerning
the amount of the rent increase. Details of the agreement can be found in the Rent
Stabilization Program's monthly report at www.alamedarentprograms.org
7. NEW BUSINESS
7-A. CASE 1136.1 - 3269 Central Ave.
No Committee review. Prior to the hearing, the parties reached an agreement concerning
the amount of the rent increase. Details of the agreement can be found in the Rent
Stabilization Program's monthly report at www.alamedarentprograms.org,
Page 4 of 7",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-10-01.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-10-01,5,"Approved Minutes
October 1, 2018
7-B. CASE 1103 - 1507 Lincoln Ave.
Tenant: Rosemary Esmedina, accompanied by ARC member Brad Hirn
Landlords: Robert Rowe, Stacey Rowe
Proposed rent increase: $500.00 (50.0%), effective October 28, 2018
Mr. Rowe said that the subject property, a single family house, was originally owned by
his grandmother. He said the house was now held in trust to provide income for the
benefit of his sister, who had considerable medical needs. Ms. Rowe said that he and
Ms. Rowe had unsuccessfully tried to come to an agreement concerning the amount of
the increase with the tenants. Ms. Rowe said they offered to lower the increase to $300
per month, bringing the monthly rent to $1,300. She said that if they had increased the
rent by 5% per year in previous years, the tenant's current rent would be just a little
less than this, but they did not know that more frequent incremental increases were
preferable to fewer larger increases. She said that part of the reason they were
increasing the rent was to ensure they had money to keep up the unit.
Ms. Esmedina said that the requested increase would create a financial hardship and
displace her. She said she was permanently disabled and receives SSI income of about
$1,219 per month, and that about 82% of her income goes toward rent. She said the
increased amount would account for about 120% of her income. She said the lights in
part of the house flicker sometimes and she uses candles and flashlights when this
happens. She proposed a $50 (5.0%) rent increase and said she believes she has been
a good tenant and has maintained the home to the best of her ability.
Vice Chair Murray asked the landlords what impact not getting an increase to $1,300
would have on them. Mr. Rowe said that they not be able to generate income from the
property and Ms. Rowe added that the purpose of keeping the home was to generate
money to support Mr. Rowe's sister, her sister-in-law, adding that selling the house was
not something they were considering. They said the house was held in trust by Mr.
Rowe for his sister's benefit and they were working on improving her health to get her
back to work following an injury that caused her to stop working 10 months ago.
Member Sullivan-Cheah went over the landlords' expenses in repairing and maintaining
the property and verified them.
Member Griffiths asked Ms. Esmedina what would happen to her if future increases
came in the years to follow and she said she did not know what she would do. Vice
Chair Murray asked if she had family in the area and she said she did, but did not think
they would be able to help her.
Member Sullivan-Cheah asked if Ms. Esmedina had considered obtaining a roommate
for the second bedroom in the home. She said it would not be ideal as she had lived
Page 5 of 7",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-10-01.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-10-01,6,"Approved Minutes
October 1, 2018
alone for 20 years. The landlords responded that they would want a higher increase
amount for another person in the unit to compensate for additional wear and tear.
Vice Chair Murray mentioned that the possible repeal of Costa Hawkins in the
November election was something the landlords may have to consider when setting the
rent, as it may make raising the rent in the future more difficult.
Ms. Rowe responded that another reason they were requesting this increase now was
because the possible appeal of Costa Hawkins may make raising the rent in the future
more difficult.
Member Griffiths proposed a stepped increase, such as allowing a smaller increase for
11 months and then having the rent increase another, larger amount in the 12th month
so that the base rent for the next year and moving forward would be something that
the landlords could accept.
Member Sullivan-Cheah opined that a roommate situation may be unavoidable to keep
Ms. Esmedina in her home and provide the income the landlords needed for their
sister's needs and proper upkeep of the house.
Member Griffiths said he believed the Committee should make a decision that would lay
the foundation for a more in-depth discussion among the parties following the hearing
that would consider a stepped increase, the addition of a roommate, and other possible
solutions.
Vice Chair Murray asked Program staff if they would be willing to mediate with the
parties after the hearing. Staff confirmed they would be willing to work with the parties
to explore options for an agreement.
The parties took their seats and the Committee deliberated.
Member Griffiths proposed an increase of $50 (to $1,050) for the first 11 months that
would then increase an additional $700 (to $1,750) in the final month. Member
Sullivan-Cheah said he liked the idea of a stepped increase but thought that 11 months
at $1,050 may provide the landlords insufficient income to cover any needed repairs at
the property. He proposed a rent of $1,050 for the first six months, and Vice Chair
Murray agreed. Member Griffiths countered with nine months at $1,050, followed by
$1,750 for the last three months.
Motion and second to extend discussion for five minutes (Vice Chair Murray and
Member Sullivan-Cheah). Motion passed 3-0.
Member Sullivan-Cheah said he thought nine months at $1,050 then three months at
$1,650 would be preferable. Vice Chair Murray disagreed, pointing out that even $1,750
for a two-bedroom house was still under market rate.
Page 6 of 7",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-10-01.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2018-10-01,7,"Approved Minutes
October 1, 2018
Motion and second for a rent increase to $1,050 for the first nine months following the
effective date, followed by another increase to $1,750 for next three months (Member
Griffiths and Vice Chair Murray). Motion failed 2-1. -
Motion and second to extend discussion another five minutes (Members Sullivan-Cheah
and Griffiths). Motion passed 3-0.
Motion and second to increase the rent to $1,050 for first nine months, then to $1,700
for the next three months, effective October 28, 2018 (Member Sullivan-Cheah and Vice
Chair Murray). Motion passed 3-0.
8. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA ITEMS, NO. 2.
a. ARC member Gloria Rios said she had lived in Alameda since the 1990's and has
noticed that the rate of rent increases outpaces the rate of salary increases. She
opined that smaller, incremental rent increases were easier for tenants to adapt
to than less frequent, larger increases.
9. MATTERS INITIATED
a. The Committee asked staff for an update on changes to the Committee's rules and
procedures that were discussed at the September 19, 2018 special meeting. Staff
informed the Committee that staff had drafted the proposed changes and they
were currently under review by the City Attorney's Office.
10.ADJOURNMENT
a. The meeting adjourned at 9:42 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
RRAC Secretary
Grant Eshoo
Approved by the Rent Review Advisory Committee on November 7, 2018
Page 7 of 7",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2018-10-01.pdf