{"body": "OpenGovernmentCommission", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION MEETING\nMONDAY FEBRUARY 6, 2017 7:00 P.M.\nChair Foreman convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.\nROLL CALL -\nPresent:\nCommissioners Aguilar, Dieter, Little, and Chair\nForeman - 4.\nAbsent:\nCommissioner Henneberry - 1.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA\nNone.\nAGENDA ITEMS\n3-A. Minutes of the October 3, 2016 Meeting\nVice Chair Dieter moved approval of the October 3, 2016 Minutes.\nCommissioner Aguilar seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote\n-\n4. [Absent: Commissioner Henneberry - 1.]\n3-B. Accept the Annual Public Report\nVice Chair Dieter stated she thinks the agenda title, \"Accept the Annual Public Report\"\nis unclear; she suggested adding the words \"on alleged violations of the Sunshine\nOrdinance and the Number of Public Records Requests\" to the title the next time the\nreport is on the agenda, so that the public will know exactly what the report is when\nreading the agenda title.\nThe Assistant City Attorney took note of Vice Chair Dieter's comments.\nCommissioner Aguilar moved approval of accepting the annual report.\nCommissioner Little seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 4.\n[Absent: Commissioner Henneberry - 1.]\nCOMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS\nVice Chair Dieter inquired the time frame of the Semi-Annual and Annual Reports, to\nwhich the Assistant City Attorney responded she does not know at the moment, but will\nprovide the answer at the next meeting.\nVice Chair Dieter requested a copy of the revised Sunshine Ordinance.\nMeeting of the\nOpen Government Commission\nFebruary 6, 2017", "path": "OpenGovernmentCommission/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "OpenGovernmentCommission", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 2, "text": "The Assistant City Clerk stated she would provide copies to all Commissioners.\nIn response to Chair Foreman's inquiry about when he was elected Chair, the Assistant\nCity Attorney stated the Commission meets twice a year and he was elected in October\n2016.\nChair Foreman stated he thought the election of officers takes place at the first meeting\nin February.\nThe Assistant City Attorney stated she will check on the practice, review the by-laws,\nand inform the Commission.\nADJOURNMENT\nThere being no further business, Chair Foreman adjourned the meeting at 7:09 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nIrma Glidden\nAssistant City Clerk\nThe agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Sunshine Ordinance.\nMeeting of the\nOpen Government Commission\nFebruary 6, 2017\n2", "path": "OpenGovernmentCommission/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 1, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of the\nRent Review Advisory Committee\nMonday, February 6, 2017\n1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL\nThe meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m.\nPresent were: Chair Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana; Vice-Chair Landess; Members Griffiths, Friedman\nAbsent: None\nVacancy: One Landlord member\nRRAC Staff: Jennifer Kauffman\nCity Attorney Staff: Michael Roush\n2. AGENDA CHANGES\na. None.\n3. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS\na.\nThe next Committee meeting will be Wednesday, February 22, 2017. More information is\navailable at www.alamedarentprogram.org.\nb. Staff explained the schedule for the evening, noting where to find the meeting agenda and\nexplaining procedures for public comment.\n4.\nPUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA, NO.1\na. No public comment.\n5. CONSENT CALENDAR\na.\nApproval of the Minutes of the January 11, 2016 Regular Meeting.\nMotion and second (Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana and Landess). Unanimously approved.\nb. Approval of the January 12, 2016 Regular Meeting.\nMotion and second (Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana and Friedman). Unanimously approved.\n6. UNFINSHED BUSINESS\na. No unfinished business.\n7. NEW BUSINESS\n7-A. Case 582 - 2007 Lincoln Ave., Unit C\nTenant: Heather Reed and Eric Strimling as designated representatives for tenant, Sia Sellu\nLandlord: John Galleto\nProposed rent increase: $55.00/month increase, effective December 1, , 2016\nPage 1 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 2, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\nCommittee members asked for clarification concerning the role of the tenant advocates. They\nverified they were authorized on behalf of Ms. Sellu to agree to a rent increase of $25.00/month\nand do not have authority beyond that. Mr. Roush stated that the representatives' participation on\nbehalf of the tenant satisfies the requirements of the Ordinance that the tenant appear at the RRAC\nmeeting.\nMr. Strimling explained that Ms. Sellu was interested in resolving this matter privately with the\nlandlord but the landlord was not open to that suggestion. Ms. Reed explained that Ms. Sellu can\nonly accept a small increase due to her disability and her fixed income. Ms. Sellu does not consider\nthe quality of the unit to warrant a $55.00/month increase. She noted that Ms. Sellu likes living in\nAlameda and considers it her home. Ms. Reed also explained that the stress of the rent review\nprocess has negatively affected Ms. Sellus health.\nThe landlord, Mr. Galleto, explained that the building is operating at a loss and that the unit's rent\nis\nbelow market rate. He said he is willing to reconsider the amount of the rent increase if the\ntenant provides documentation to demonstrate her claim that she us unable to pay the $55.00\nincrease. He clarified that he would need to see the type of documentation associated with a typical\nrental application.\nThe tenant advocates stated Ms. Sellu would be willing to complete a rental application form but\nwanted to ensure that her medical information would not be used against her and that her tenancy\nwould not be terminated.\nChair Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana emphasized that the goal of the Committee is to facilitate discussions\nbetween a tenant and a landlord in order to reach an agreement between the tenant and landlord.\nWhen parties are unable to reach an agreement, the Committee shifts from facilitators to making\na recommendation regarding the amount of the rent increase. Mr. Roush added that the tenant and\nlandlord may still negotiate an agreement after the Committee recommendation.\nMember Friedman recommended postponing the case to allow both parties an opportunity to\nnegotiate. The tenant advocates stated that Ms. Sellu would like a decision this evening. The\nCommittee agreed to make a recommendation.\nVice-Chair Landess expressed concern for both parties. She acknowledged that it appeared\nthis rent increase and review process have been stressful for the tenant. She also stated that\nthe landlord expenses have increased. She recommended that a $55.00 (5%) is reasonable.\nMember Friedman noted that landlord included in the rent increase calculation costs related\nto a reserve fund to be used when a termination requires relocation assistance fees. While\nhe noted this is a real cost, he did not agree that the landlord's calculation of these costs\nwere reasonable and did not agree that the costs justify a 5% increase. In addition, he noted\nthat he does not believe the landlord's mortgage costs are valid factors in calculating a rent\nPage 2 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 3, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\nincrease. Taking in good faith the comments of the tenant, he asserted that it appears the\n5% increase poses a financial burden on the tenant. He recommended a $33 (3.0%)\nincrease.\nChair Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana noted that he is taking the comments of the landlord and tenant in\ngood faith. He summarized that the tenant expressed she is unable to pay the 5% increase\nand the landlord stated he would reconsider the amount of the rent increase if the tenant\nprovides documentation of her inability to pay the higher rent. In addition, the tenant\nrepresentatives stated the tenant would be willing to provide the requested documentation.\nTherefore, he stated that it appears both parties may be able to work out an agreement of a\n$25 increase when the requested documentation is provided by the tenant. Thus, he\nrecommended a $25 (2.3%) increase.\nMember Griffiths stated that he recognizes the tenant is facing a hardship with this rent\nincrease. He also noted that he appreciates that the landlord has a history of reasonable\nrent increases. While he agrees with Member Landess that 5% is a reasonable increase for\nthe landlord, he also acknowledged the tenant is a difficult situation. He recommended an\nincrease of $25.00 (2.3%) and encouraged parties to meet privately so that the landlord's\nrequested documentation could be provided by the tenant.\nMotion and second for Committee to recommend an increase of $25.00 (2.3%) effective March\n1st, 2017 (Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana and Griffiths). Passed with Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana, Griffiths, and Friedman\nvoting yes and Landess voting no.\nMotion and second for 5 minute recess (Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana and Landess). Unanimously approved.\n7-B. Case 653 - 43 Sandpiper Pl.\nProposed Rent Increase: $480.00 (15.1%), effective March 1, 2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\n7-C. Case 683 - 871 Oak St.\nProposed Rent Increase: $1,000.00 (50.0%), effective March 15, 2017\nReview was postponed to the February 22, 2017 Committee meeting.\n7-D. CASE 655 - 300 Westline Dr., Unit A101\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $60.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $785.00 (25.7%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/16/2017\nPage 3 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 4, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant provided written documentation\nto the landlord that they will vacate the unit.\n7-E. CASE 656 - 300 Westline Dr., Unit A102\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $60.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $785.00 (25.7%); Under review\nEffective date: 3/1/17\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant provided written documentation\nto the landlord that they will vacate the unit.\n7-F. CASE 657 - 300 Westline Dr., Unit A112\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $101.00 (4.8%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $538.00 (25.8%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/6/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\n7-G. CASE 659 - 310 Westline Dr., Unit B207\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $82.00 (2.9%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $771.00 (27.2%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/17/17\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant provided written documentation\nto the landlord that they will vacate the unit.\n7-H. CASE 660 - 310 Westline Dr., Unit B213\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $73.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $959.00 (26.1%); Under review\nEffective date: Delayed until RRAC review.\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant provided written documentation\nto the landlord that they will vacate the unit.\n7-I. CASE 661 - 310 Westline Dr., Unit B315\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $64.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $842.00 (26.1%); Under review\nEffective date: Delayed until RRAC review.\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\nPage 4 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 5, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\n7-J. CASE 663 - 330 Westline Dr., Unit B329\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $105.00 (4.7%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $552.00 (25.0%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/5/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\n7-K. CASE 664 - 344 Westline Dr., Unit C115\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $101.00 (4.9%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $538.00 (26.4%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/21/2017\nNo Committee review. The tenant did not attend the meeting. Hence, the Committee took no\naction and both options on the rent increase notice are valid. The tenant retains the option to\nchoose the 12-month lease offer or the month-to-month rental agreement offer.\n7-L. CASE 665 - 344 Westline Dr., Unit C119\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $43.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $497.00 (22.6%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/20/2017\nNo Committee review. The tenant did not attend the meeting. Hence, the Committee took no\naction and both options on the rent increase notice are valid. The tenant retains the option to\nchoose the 12-month lease offer or the month-to-month rental agreement offer.\n7-M. CASE 666 - 344 Westline Dr., Unit C223\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $44.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $502.00 (22.6%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/9/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease of 15.0%.\n7-N. CASE 668 - 909 Shorepoint Ct., Unit D214\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $39.00 (1.9%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $657.00 (33.0%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/18/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\nPage 5 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 6, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\n7-O. CASE 669 - 909 Shorepoint Ct., Unit D216\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $46.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $355.00 (15.2%); Under review\nEffective date: Delayed until RRAC review.\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\n7-P. CASE 670 - 909 Shorepoint Ct., Unit D316\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $112.00 (5.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $406.00 (18.1%); Under review\nEffective date: Delayed until RRAC review.\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant provided written documentation\nto the landlord that they will vacate the unit.\n7-Q. CASE 672 - 915 Shorepoint Ct., Unit E230\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $122.00 (4.8%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $732.00 (28.5%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/10/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\n7-R. CASE 673 - 915 Shorepoint Ct., Unit E309\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $54.00 (1.9%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $713.00 (26.7%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/19/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\n7-S. CASE 675 - 941 Shorepoint Ct., Unit F203\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $102.00 (5.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $541.00 (26.3%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/17/2017\nNo Committee review. The tenant did not attend the meeting. Hence, the Committee took no\naction and both options on the rent increase notice are valid. The tenant retains the option to\nchoose the 12-month lease offer or the month-to-month rental agreement offer.\n7-T.CASE 676 - 941 Shorepoint Ct., Unit F303\nPage 6 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 7, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $46.00 (1.9%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $517.00 (21.6%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/23/2017\nNo Committee review. The tenant did not attend the meeting. Hence, the Committee took no\naction and both options on the rent increase notice are valid. The tenant retains the option to\nchoose the 12-month lease offer or the month-to-month rental agreement offer.\n7-U. CASE 677 - 941 Shorepoint Ct., Unit F328\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $117.00 (4.9%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $701.00 (29.2%); Under review\nEffective date: Delayed until RRAC review.\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant provided written documentation\nto the landlord that they will vacate the unit.\n7-V. CASE 679 - 937 Shorepoint Ct., Unit G201\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $57.00 (2.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $756.00 (26.1%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/22/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant provided written documentation\nto the landlord that they will vacate the unit.\n7-W. CASE 680 - 937 Shorepoint Ct., Unit G308\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $124.00 (5.0%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $741.00 (29.9%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/12/2017\nNo Committee review. The tenant did not attend the meeting. Hence, the Committee took no\naction and both options on the rent increase notice are valid. The tenant retains the option to\nchoose the 12-month lease offer or the month-to-month rental agreement offer.\n7-X. CASE 681 - 937 Shorepoint Ct., Unit G314\nProposed rent increases:\n12-month lease - $66.00 (4.9%); No review\nMonth-to-month agreement - $441.00 (32.9%); Under review\nEffective date: 2/10/2017\nNo Committee review. Prior to the RRAC meeting, the tenant and landlord agreed to a rent\nincrease between 0-5%.\n7-Y Discuss Committee members' attendance at the March 7, 2017 City Council meeting to\nrepresent recommendations passed at the January 24, 2017 RRAC special meeting\nPage 7 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2017-02-06", "page": 8, "text": "Approved Minutes\nFebruary 6, 2017\nStaff shared an update that the City Council meeting to review the Ordinance will not be held in\nMarch. Staff will update the Committee when the exact date is known. City Attorney staff\nconfirmed that he will forward the Committee recommendations, approved January 24, 2017, to\nall Committee members for review prior to the City Council meeting.\nChair Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana confirmed that he will attend the meeting to present the Committee's\nrecommendations. He encouraged other Committee members to attend the meeting as well.\n8. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA, NO. 2.\na. Angie Watson-Hajjem of ECHO Housing spoke about ECHO's Fair Housing and tenant-\nlandlord mediation services.\n9. MATTERS INITIATED\na.\nChair Sullivan-Sari\u00f1ana suggested setting aside time at an upcoming meeting to discuss\nthe criteria the Committee uses in determining a reasonable rent increase. He requested that\nthe City Attorney's Office provide guidance for that discussion. Staff confirmed that this\nmatter will be agendized in a future Committee meeting.\n10. ADJOURNMENT\nThe meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:14 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nRRAC Secretary\nJennifer Kauffman\nApproved by the Rent Review Advisory Committee on March 6, 2017.\nPage 8 of 8", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-02-06.pdf"}