pages: RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-03-04.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee | 2019-03-04 | 5 | Approved Minutes March 4, 2019 Mr. Kirk said he was a carpenter and is now retired and disabled, and needed to increase the rent to earn a reasonable rate of return. He said if his requested increase was approved he would earn a return of 3.9 percent. He noted that had he raised the rent 5% every year since the tenancy began the rent would be higher than what he was currently requesting. He said he thought the unit was below market rate even with the increase. Mr. Griffith said that his unit was a studio, that he thought Mr. Kirk had been very fair, and acknowledged his rent was below market rate. He said there had been prior increases of about 4% and thought the current requested increase was high. He shared that he was hoping to compromise for an increase of about 10%, or a total rent of around $1,230. Mr. Kirk said previous increases were not 4% each, but 2.9%, 2.7%, 2.7%, 2.6%, 2.5%, 2.95%, and last year 3.9 percent. He said he had no problem working out a payment method for the tenant, but felt he needed to increase the rent the same amount for him as he did for another tenant in a similar unit. He said he thought he had raised the rent too little in previous years to keep up with costs. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked if it was Mr. Kirk's intention to raise rents 5% per year going forward until the unit reached market rate. Mr. Kirk answered that he wanted to raise rents to obtain a fair rate of return, rather than market rate. Mr. Kirk said he had a family to consider, and since the value of the property would be determined by the income it could produce, he would be hurting his family if he did not raise the rent. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah asked if there were any outstanding issues with the unit that needed to be addressed and Mr. Griffith replied there was a bit of water damage. Chair Murray confirmed that the parties were not willing to come to a compromise and they preferred that the Committee make a decision. The participants took a seat and the Committee began deliberations. Member Johnson opined that a raise of 15% seemed acceptable. Vice Chair Sullivan-Cheah said he did not think the landlord's requested rent increase was unreasonable given its location and the fact that prior increases were relatively low, while also noting that it was reasonable for the tenant to request a lower increase. Chair Murray echoed these sentiments, saying she was glad community members felt comfortable coming to the Committee with their concerns and perspectives. She noted the landlord had invested significant upgrades in the property and said it was appropriate to seek balance in deciding how much of an increase would be allowed, as too much of an increase could negatively impact the tenant and too little could hurt the landlord. She said the Committee's charge is to make sure people can stay in Alameda, | RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2019-03-04.pdf |