pages: CityCouncil/2019-09-03.pdf, 15
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2019-09-03 | 15 | does not typify the majority of landlords in the City; expressed support for the urgency ordinance; requested Council consideration for items which may have unintended consequences; stated relocation payments for certain categories of renters, such as tenants 62 years and older, tenants with disabilities, and tenants with minor children in the household, will be augmented; outlined exhibit A; stated the numbers are based off HUD figures; the augmented rent raises the amounts by almost $2,000; the unintended consequence could be discrimination based on income or supposed future hardships for the landlord; the rationale behind augmented relocation fees are to help those that are most vulnerable; to aid in relocation, a consultant service can be used when a renter receives a no fault eviction notice; discussed Measure A; stated Alameda's multi-family housing stock is limited and is getting older; the ordinance can still move forward on an urgency basis and Council can decide to eliminate the column in the table; expressed concern for the per diem rates on hotels and motels; stated the meal cost is acceptable; $335 per day is steep; a modification can be made; an unintended consequence is discriminating against tenants who have pets due to added relocation costs; habitable housing stock is needed; consideration must be made for the financial burden being imposed on landlords; changes should be made to the augmented relocation payments and the housing per diems. Councilmember Oddie stated that he is happy to look at the per diem costs again; his preference is to pass as-is and bring it back for further discussion; expressed concern for the potential discrimination against tenants with disabilities or children; stated that it is illegal but does happen. (19-482) Councilmember Oddie moved approval of suspending the rules to allow Councilmembers to have more time. Councilmember Vella seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Councilmember Oddie stated further discussion is needed; he would like information on other cities which have augmented relocation benefits. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she does not want to ascribe bad motives to someone's decisions, but fair changes have been made; Council can have relocation consultants come in and provide the help needed. Councilmember Vella stated there are weekly and monthly rates for boarding costs for pets; relocation benefits are not necessarily a basis for who landlords will rent to; there is a 2% vacancy rate; there is a differentiation protecting those who are already housed; due to the difficulty the most vulnerable has being able to find housing, it is important to keep those who are housed in their home; outlined relocation consultant drawbacks based on a trial use in Los Angeles; stated there are a number of issues including liability costs potentially being bore by the City; evidence needs to be found that discrimination occurs based on relocation costs; expressed support for not incentivizing Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 3, 2019 13 | CityCouncil/2019-09-03.pdf |