pages: CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2018-06-05 | 14 | Councilmember Oddie inquired whether the Council can legally charge $119 or is required to set the fee at $106. The Community Development Director stated Council can set the fee at $119; at some point if costs continue to come in less than the amount collected, the fee will have to be lowered or money would have to be refunded. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she is concerned 19% of landlords are delinquent in paying the fee; inquired whether delinquency can be carried over to the next fiscal year. The Assistant City Attorney responded the resolution before Council addresses delinquency; stated that he does not recall the previous resolution doing so; the City probably could carry it forward, but it will increase the surplus. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the Council expressed support for transferring $500,000 into a fund for legal services; a lot of staff time in the City Attorney's office and at the Housing Authority is spent answering questions; she would like a closer look at whether some of the fee could be allocated to legal services; inquired whether staff can do so. The Community Development Director stated the legal analysis allowable under the fee study is the cost for the City Attorney's office providing legal counsel to the rent program on the interpretation of the ordinance; the Council gave direction on a 3-year pilot program for low income tenants, which will return as part of the budget; civil actions are far more broad than the scope of the City's ordinance; most issues that come up for tenants are for cause and no cause evictions and habitability issues; the kinds of legal services and advice that would be given are broader than the ordinance and were not contemplated in the fee study; if there is a desire to use the fee, the deeper dive would have to be done next year when the nexus is determined. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated the ordinance is to address the housing crisis. The Community Development Director stated the issue is can the services be paid via a fee, as a tax or from the general fund; staff does not believe fees under Proposition 26 can withstand the test of linking the cost directly to implementing the program; providing legal services is broader than the ordinance and was not in the current fee study. The Assistant City Attorney stated a regulatory fee is before Council, which are exempt from Proposition 26 analysis; the fee has to be reasonable and necessary because of the services the government is providing; typically rent control jurisdictions do not get involved when it comes to the eviction process other than to set the ground for evictions; the concern is it has to be necessary for the government to provide services, such as eviction defense, which it is not; there is a clear distinction between the services provided by the City Attorney's office in advising the Housing Authority Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 14 June 5, 2018 | CityCouncil/2018-06-05.pdf |