1 of 2
Attachment 3
SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH MEETINGS
2 of 2
STAKEHOLDER INPUT RECEIVED
Local Ordinance
Needed Not Needed
• Prevent statewide eviction trends.
• Eliminate loopholes in state law.
• Pro-active vs. reactive approach to non-compliant
landlords.
• Establish first-right-of-refusal to return to unit.
• Greater tenant harassment protections.
• Reactive without demonstrated need.
• State law is adequate.
• Unintended consequences:
o Impact to other tenants; and
o Disincentivizing development/remodels.
• Creating loopholes for non-compliant tenants.
Concepts (December 2021)
Ellis Act
• Relocation should be tied to economics means testing or fixed amounts.
No Cause
• Defining substantial rehabilitation is desirable but do not identify permit threshold. • Include first right of refusal to return but further work on rental rate on return.
Alternatives
• Education (Tenants and Landlords).
• City enforcement for business license re-issuance.
• Using statewide industry partners for tenant defense. • Dispute Resolution/Mediation
Draft Ordinance (January 2022)
• Ordinance should acknowledge landlord rights.
• The number and scope of the harassment definitions too broad. • Just-Cause provisions should apply on day one of tenancy. • Relocation assistance payments needed to be rewritten to match industry practices (e.g., using one check for all tenants).
• Landlords need to be able to terminate tenancy based on substantial remodel. This can be accomplished in a way that minimizes harm to tenants.
• This will expose landlords to excessive litigation.
• The ordinance is too biased towards tenants.
• Consider whether appropriate to apply to mobile home renter.
Housing Advisory Commission (January 31, 2022)
• Commissioners indicated they would like to see greater emphasis on the following:
• Production of affordable units where these issues are mitigated; • Alternative dispute resolution; and
• Additional data.
• Stakeholders provided similar feedback to individual meetings.
Final Ordinance (February 2022)
• Tenant advocates believe without a few key items the ordinance is not valuable: all housing types need to be covered, coverage needs to start on day 1 of tenancy, on substantial rehabilitation tenants need to return to unit at same rental rate.
• All stakeholders agreed that the City should not move forward with the ordinance as currently drafted.