{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 1, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\nMinutes of a Regular Meeting of the\nRent Review Advisory Committee\nMonday, June 3, 2019\n1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL\nThe meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m.\nPresent:\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah; Members Chiu and Sidelnikov\nAbsent:\nChair Murray, Member Johnson\nProgram staff:\nGrant Eshoo and Samantha Columbus\nCity Attorney staff: John Le\n2. AGENDA CHANGES\nStaff recommended that the Committee hear Agenda Item 7-B first in New Business,\nas an interpreter had been reserved for the tenant, and the Committee agreed.\n3. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS\nStaff informed the Committee that staff was waiting on Chair Murray to confirm\nwhether or not she would like to remotely attend the planned June 21, 2019 Committee\ntraining or postpone it, as she was not able to be physically present for it.\n4. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA ITEMS, NO.1\nNone.\n5. CONSENT CALENDAR\n5-A. Approval of the minutes of the March 4, 2019 regular meeting\nMember Sidelnikov indicated he had reviewed the audio for this meeting, so that he\nmay vote on approval of the minutes even though he was not in attendance at the\nMarch 4 meeting. Motion and second to approve the minutes (Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah\nand Member Sidelnikov). Motion passed 3-0.\n5-B. Approval of the minutes of the May 1, 2019 regular meeting\nMotion and second to approve the minutes (Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah and Member\nSidelnikov). Motion passed 3-0.", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 2, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\n6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS\nNone.\n7. NEW BUSINESS\nStaff called roll of meeting participants and all parties for all agenda items were\npresent.\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah made an announcement that this was a public meeting\nand anything said or shared during the proceedings would become a public record, as\nthe meeting was audio recorded and minutes were taken.\n7-B. Case RI1263.1 - 1845 Poggi St., Apt. D209\nTenant: Gamil Hadwan\nLandlords: Andy King and Shahzad Raufi\nProposed rent increase: $251.50 (15.5%), to a total rent of $1,879.00,\neffective July 1, 2019\nMr. King said the current owners purchased the complex two years ago with the intent\nto make improvements such as seismic upgrades, balcony repairs, and add new\namenities like a fitness center and children's playground. He shared that the owners\nhad repainted the building and replaced roofs. Mr. King provided the Committee with a\nprintout of a unit he said is comparable that was asking $2,250.00 per month.\nThrough an interpreter, Mr. Hadwan said the landlord offered a $1,000 gift card or\noption to fix things in the apartment in return for the tenant signing a contract agreeing\nto the requested rent increase without RRAC review. He said his rent was lowered to\n$1,627.50 but did not understand why. He added the amount requested, $1,879.00,\nwas too high.\nStaff clarified that the landlords reset the base rent after staff had alerted them to prior\ninvalid increases at the unit.\nMember Chiu asked Mr. Hadwan to describe the hardship the increase would have. Mr.\nHadwan said his son is going to San Francisco City College, and he is paying his son's\neducation expenses. He said his commuting costs come to about $200 per month, and\nother expenses were already hard to meet. He stated that he makes about $3,000.00\nper month, but his income varies, and he is the only working member of his household.\nMember Sidelnikov asked how much of an increase he could afford, and Mr. Hadwan\nreplied he was not sure what was fair, and would like the Committee to make the\ndecision for him.", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 3, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah clarified that Mr. Hadwan's stated income of $3,000.00 per\nmonth was his net income. Mr. Hadwan added that he can sometimes make extra\nmoney working overtime, but overtime was not guaranteed. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah\nasked if there had been improvements made to his unit and Mr. Hadwan said that\nnothing in his unit had been improved or replaced. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr.\nHadwan what does for a living, and he said he is a janitor.\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr. King to clarify what amount he believed\ncomparable units were renting for and Mr. King said $2,250.00 and they had recently\nleased two one-bedroom units for $2,404.00. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked if those\nunits had received upgrades and Mr. King replied that they had new paint, carpet, and\nsome of them had new cabinetry.\nMr. King proposed a total rent of rent of $1,785.00, and increase of $157.50 (9.7%),\neffective 7/1/19, and Mr. Hadwan accepted.\n7-A. Case RI1274.1 - 1415 Broadway, Apt. 311\nTenant: Valerie Price and Brad Price\nLandlords: George Gousios\nProposed rent increase: $147.00 (10.0%), to a total rent of $1,617.00,\neffective May 1, 2019\nMs. Price said she has lived in Alameda for four years with her husband and two\nchildren. She said the increase would cause a financial hardship and she believed the\nowner should not raise the rent because of an ongoing mold problem. She said they\nhave not had access to the pool since shortly after moving in, which she believed was a\ndecrease in housing services, and that should result in a decrease in rent. She told the\nCommittee that their current rent accounted for 35% of their combined income, that\nthe unit was small and had old appliances and fixtures, and that the unit's rent was\nbelow market because of the condition of the unit.\nMr. Price said that the windows leaked, the bathroom lacked an exhaust fan, there was\na tarp covering a leaky ceiling, and their electricity bill had increased after the landlord\ngave them a dehumidifier to combat moisture in the unit. He added that they had been\ntemporarily relocated during prior remediation work and alleged multiple increases had\nbeen imposed within a 12 month period (which the landlord had rescinded and\nreimbursed) including an increase in their parking fee earlier in the year.\nMr. Gousios said that a prior increase was reversed because it was slightly over 5% and\nthe current increase request was less than if they had increased the rent 5% per year\nover the last two years. He said the rent was below market rate, and he had paid\n$7,000 remedying the unit's mold problem, and the roof leak was scheduled to be\naddressed before the next rainy season. He said he thinks the tenants make more", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 4, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\nmoney now than when they moved in and would be happy to come to an agreement\nwhere they would be paying the same income-to-rent ratio as when they moved in. He\nsaid the pool was not open when the tenants moved in and he had been looking into\nrestoring it.\nMr. Chiu asked how recently the pictures provided in the tenants' submission were\ntaken and Mr. Price said they were taken several months ago and prior to the landlord\nremedying the unit, but doubted whether the remediation would last as the mold had\nreturned after the first time they remedied it. Mr. Gousios responded that the walls\nwere treated by a professional and believes the work was done in an acceptable\nmanner. The tenants said they had moved back in the last month and a half and no\nfurther water intrusion had been observed, but they were worried it would return when\nheavier winter rains return. Member Chiu asked if they both worked and the tenants\naffirmed they did.\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked the tenants if they were satisfied with the work done\nby the landlord and they said they were satisfied with the work done to date. Vice Chair\nSullivan-Cheah asked if other units had similar problems and Mr. Gousios said that none\ndid, and this unit did not either until the current tenancy. Mr. Gousios and Ms. Moran\nprovided pictures of the work done to the unit. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr.\nGousios how he came to the requested increase amount and Mr. Gousios replied that\nhe would like a 10% increase to have 5% for this year and 5% for the prior invalid\nincrease he had to pay back to the tenants that was invalid because it was $0.50 over\nthe 5% limit.\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked the tenants how much of an increase they thought was\nreasonable and Mr. Price said he thought 5% or $73.00 was reasonable because it was\nwhat they could afford. Ms. Price said their budget was tight, that they had maybe\n$30.00 left over after their bills were paid each month.\nMr. Gousios offered an increase of 8% and Ms. Price replied that they could not afford\nit. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr. Gousios why he was requesting the increase and\nMr. Gousios replied that he had increased labor costs, had refinanced the property and\nthose costs increase if the property is not generating income or seeing rent increases\nthat keep up with costs. He said he thinks the unit is below market rate. The tenants\nreplied that their income had dropped since they moved in and having a second child\nhad increased their expenses.\nAs the parties were unable to reach an agreement, they took their seats, and the\nCommittee began deliberations.\nMember Chiu reflected on the tenant's financial burden, the improvements made to the\nproperty, and other factors the parties offered. He said he thought an increase of 7-8%\nwould be reasonable.", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 5, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\nMr. Sidelnikov referenced that the tenants had been paying an increase of 5% for some\ntime before it was reversed and also thought an increase of around 8% was a middle\nground between the 5% offered by the tenant and the 10% requested by landlord. He\nsaid he thought the amount of time it took for the landlord to fix the maintenance\nissues was a concern.\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah said he was also concerned by the time it took for the\nlandlord to address the repairs, and noted the tenants had not been able to use the\npool since the first summer after the tenancy began, which seemed like a decrease in\nhousing services. He questioned basing a decision on percentages, and offered that his\nown rent was 70% of his income and he thought it made more sense to consider the\nincrease in dollars.\nMotion and second for an increase of $102.00 (6.9%), to a total rent of $1,572.00,\neffective July 1, 2019 (Members Chiu and Sidelnikov). Motion passed 3-0.\n7-C. Case RI1270.1 - 1845 Poggi St., Apt. D317\nTenant: Alamin Abdelkadir\nLandlords: Andy King and Shahzad Raufi\nProposed rent increase: $190.00 (15.5%), to a total rent of $1,415.00,\neffective July 1, 2019\nMr. King clarified that the original increase request was 9.9% and became 15.5% after\nthe valid base rent was lowered and a previous invalid increase was rescinded and\novercharges were reimbursed to the tenant.\nMr. Abdelkadir said the management offered a gift card or improvements in exchange\nfor agreeing to the rent increase without RRAC review and he did not agree. He said\nthat his unit has not been upgraded at all since he moved in.\nMr. King added that another resident in the unit had previously agreed to the rent\nincrease but program staff determined the agreement was invalid and the matter could\nproceed for RRAC review.\nMr. Abdelkadir said he would pay an increase if repairs were done: having the windows\nreplaced because they leaked, the carpet replaced because it was old, the refrigerator\nreplaced because it made noise, and the stove replaced because it did not work.\nMr. King said he would replace the carpet, stove, and refrigerator in exchange for a\n$190 rent increase. Mr. Abdelkadir accepted. Mr. King said they could do the upgrades\nbefore the increase went into effect on July 1, 2019.\n7-D. Case RI1278 - 1365 Ballena Blvd., Apt. A", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 6, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\nTenants: Tamu Harper and Tim Taylor\nLandlords: Antonio Di Marco and Patty Sul\nProposed rent increase: $92.00 (4.8%), to a total rent of $2,015.00,\neffective June 22, 2019\nMs. Harper said that years ago her family was displaced by a fire at a different property\nmanaged by the same company and were moved to this unit. She said that the\nmanager has had to remediate mold in their unit several times, yet mold was still an\nongoing issue. She said the County Health Department had determined that several\nrepairs were needed to bring the unit into compliance with code and they were\nconcerned about habitability issues, as the mold may be returning. She said because of\na change in management she thinks there may have been gaps in communication that\nhad caused an unsatisfactory customer service experience.\nMs. Harper mentioned health concerns due to the mold and staff reminded the\nattendees that the meeting was public and what was said would become a matter of\npublic record. Ms. Harper said she was fine with her statements being public.\nMs. Sul said that her company began managing the building in 2017. She said they\nmonitored the unit for moisture intrusion and other reported problems and tried\ndifferent things to try to keep air circulating, repaired a leak, and the unit passed\ninspection after repairs were made. She said they implemented increases of under 3%\nthe last two years and would continue doing repairs moving forward as needed. She\nadded that they provided the tenants with $2,500.00 as compensation for the\ninconveniences they experienced, and in exchange for the tenants signing a release\nform, which they did.\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah said he wanted to make sure that parties were focusing on\ncurrent issues and not past matters that had been resolved. Ms. Harper said she\nthought the current mold problem was not addressed in a timely enough manner, as it\ntook management 60 days to respond.\nMs. Suk replied that management had enlisted third party hygienists to analyze the\nunit, and they were scheduled to visit the unit tomorrow. She explained they take\nsamples and test them in a lab, and the last samples they tested showed that the mold\nspores levels inside the unit were less than samples taken from outside air. Ms. Harper\nsaid she did not trust the result of the test because they had remediated the unit before\nand the mold had come back.\nStaff noted less than 20 minutes remained before the Committee could not initiate\nreview of additional agenda items and asked if the Committee would like to dismiss the\nparties who were waiting to be called for the last item on the agenda. Vice Chair\nSullivan-Cheah said he thought he could get through the current case within 20\nminutes.", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 7, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\nMr. Taylor said he was the only member of the household working and thought there\nshould be no increase in rent. Ms. Suk replied that she thought the work done on the\nbuilding recently justified the requested increase amount. Ms. Harper said the laundry\nmachines were prone to breaking, and the gym was not up to par. Mr. Taylor said he\npays about 60% of his income toward rent.\nMs. Suk said she would accept an increase of $50.00 and Mr. Taylor and Ms. Harper\nagreed to the $50.00 increase with a one-year lease, effective June 23, 2019.\n7-E. Case RI1285 - 901 Central Ave., Apt. B\nTenant: Salem Boussadia\nLandlord: Jose Cerda-Zein\nProposed rent increase: $89.00 (5.0%), to a total rent of $1,874.00,\neffective June 1, 2019\nMr. Boussadia said he lost his job three months ago and his wife is the only household\nmember working right now. He said he was having trouble scheduling some job\nopportunities that had come his way. He said he and his wife have two minor children,\nand his wife is a medical assistant. Concerning the unit, he said that the windows were\nold, the floors creaked, and they could not afford 5% increases each year.\nMr. Cerda-Zein said this property was a recent acquisition for his management\ncompany, but he did not believe there were any outstanding maintenance issues, as\nseveral had been remedied in the past year. He said they had requested a 5% increase\nin December 2018 but withdrew it to fix additional things and to give the tenants\nadditional time to prepare for the increase. He shared that the average rent for a two-\nbedroom unit in Alameda was $2,600.00 per month.\nMr. Boussadia said the unit did not insulate noise and they recently discovered a water\nleak. Mr. Cerda-Zein responded that he had not been made aware of the water leak,\nbut if a tenant makes a complaint, their policy is to respond within three business days.\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked Mr. Boussadia if he had any job leads and he replied he\ndid not currently. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked how much of their household income\nwent toward rent and he replied that about 85% of their income went toward rent,\nadding that he needed to find a job as soon as possible.\nMr. Cerda-Zein said he thought the requested amount was fair and the owner wanted\nto implement it before the City Council passed further legislation restricting rent\nincreases. He said the owner depends on income from the property and was losing\nmoney on another vacant commercial unit he owns.", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}
{"body": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee", "date": "2019-06-03", "page": 8, "text": "Approved Minutes\nJune 3, 2019\nVice Chair Sullivan-Cheah said he did not think it was unreasonable for the landlord to\nbe asking for this increase. He also noted the tenant was severely rent-burdened,\npaying 85% of their income toward rent.\nMember Sidelnikov said he thought the tenant's situation was severe and at the same\ntime noted that the rent was below market rate. He commented that rescinding the\nprior increase to give the tenant extra time was a commendable thing to do and the\ntenant may have to adjust his schedule to accommodate employment opportunities.\nMotion and second for a $0.00 increase for June 2019 followed by a $44.00 (2.5%)\nincrease, to a total rent of $1,829.00, effective July 1, 2019 (Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah\nand Member Chiu). Motion passed 3-0.\n7-F. Discussion on RRAC member attendance requirements\nThe Committee agreed to table discussion of this item, as new items may not be\ninitiated after 9:00 p.m.\n8. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA ITEMS, NO.2\nNone.\n9. MATTERS INTIATED\nNone.\n10. ADJOURNMENT\nThe meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted,\nRRAC Secretary\nGrant Eshoo\nApproved by the Rent Review Advisory Committee on July 1, 2019", "path": "RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-06-03.pdf"}