pages: RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-09-06.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee | 2017-09-06 | 4 | Draft Minutes September 6, 2017 discrepancy with the landlord's knowledge of the City's regulations and choice to purchase property that puts them in this difficult situation. He acknowledged that the landlord has identified financial pressures, though it appears that those pressures may be more adaptable than the tenant's. Recognizing that any Committee decision will cause one or both of the families to struggle, Sullivan SariƱana recommended a $275 increase to a total rent of $1,375. Motion and second for $100 rent increase to a total rent of $1,200 (Griffiths and Friedman). Motion passes with Cambra approval; Sullivan-SariƱana and Murray opposed. 7-C. CASE 919 - 1625 Santa Clara Ave., Unit 2 Tenant: Charles Sullivan, Gini Zuniga Landlord: David Harris Proposed Rent Increase: $130 (10%) to a total rent of $1,430.00, effective date delayed until RRAC review Third-party rent decision: Binding David Harris stated that the current rent is 38% below market rate. The rent was not raised annually and there are anticipated costs near $150,000 related foundation repairs due to the raising water table. Mr. Harris explained that he is retired an increasingly relies on the property for income. The current annual profit is $23,000 annually which is a 1.7% return on investment. The landlord clarified that his calculated annual expenses do not include a $150,000 loan, which he pays separate from the management company. He explained that family needs have taken his focus away from the rental property for the last five years. Based on the lack of previous rent increases, below market rent, and anticipated foundation repairs, he considers a 10% increase modest. Charles Sullivan and Gini Zuniga stated they have lived in Alameda for six years. They are concerned that the property has been flooding during rains and seems to have malfunctioning pipes. The tenants noted they had never met Mr. Harris and have only corresponded with the management company. They indicated the rent increase poses a financial difficulty based on their salaries working as a pre-K teacher and emergency technician, indicating that currently about 45% of their income is spend on rent. The tenants affirmed that they do not always receive annual raises. Mr. Sullivan indicated that the $130 rent increase offer was a surprise and feels like a significant jump. Page 4 of 7 | RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-09-06.pdf |