pages: CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf, 35
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2016-02-16 | 35 | Councilmember Daysog clarified the motion is to exempt parcels with rental units consisting of 5 units or less from the relocation benefits requirement, have a relocation benefits assistance formula for parcels with rentals of 6 to 10 units start with ordinance adoption, and lower relocation assistance to 2 months plus $1,500 versus the 4 months plus $1,500. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on the formula for 6 to 10 units. Councilmember Daysog clarified if the ordinance is adopted, a tenant who has lived in the unit for 5 years is eligible for 4 years' worth of relocation assistance which is fine for the larger apartments to absorb the costs but not for small mom and pop landlords. Councilmember Daysog's motion FAILED for lack of second. Councilmember Daysog stated the legislation before the Council is an ordinance that provides protection for only the tenants, not the mom and pop landlords; Council should move forward with the renter protection ordinance; stated in the future he would like to see a renter and small mom and pop landlord protection ordinance. The Community Development Director stated staff has two items to clarify: on page 10 the intent of Section 6-58.50C is that if the property owner does not properly notice the rent increase, that they have the ability to cure and re-notice to have the rent increase go into effect if they re-notice correctly; staff did not pick up that parallel change on page 14 under Section 6-58-75C, which would read that there would be an opportunity to cure an incorrectly noticed rent increase by allowing the landlord to re-notice; on page 12, Section 6-58.65, units exempt from Costa Hawkins and requesting a rent increase over 5%, must have increases go into effect at the effective date of the notice, after the RRAC process; language needs to be relocated to make it clear. The Assistant City Attorney stated the proposed language is moving the underlined Section 6-58.65 that says: "Unless you and your housing provider agree, the rent increase will not go into effect until the committee reviews the rent increase." Mayor Spencer inquired whether the change is State law. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification on whether Council would introduce the ordinance and take a separate vote to adopt the resolution adopting policy concerning CIP. Mayor Spencer stated the CIP is not being discussed. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Daysog seconded the motion, which carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Daysog, Ezzy Ashcraft, Oddie and Mayor Spencer - 4. Noes: Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 33 February 16, 2016 | CityCouncil/2016-02-16.pdf |