fon EenameOD
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
Telephone
Honorable Mayor & City Council 03/26/24
Good Evening. I have returned hoping to stir your conscience by revealing the financial devastation the City Council has brought to the homeless and renters of our community. Your delay in addressing the obvious flaws of the “ Tenant Protection Ordinance” has brought more financial harm to our residents then any other Council action in the history of Chula Vista.
A quick research of previous Council’s statements reveals all members had reservations regarding some clauses of the TPO. Jill Gavez voted against the Ordinance foreseeing the obvious financial devastation which would be placed on our community’s residents.
Faced with a deadline before leaving office the measure was passed with the hope this Council would correct the TPO’s flawed clauses.
It is past time to do so. You have already been made aware that:
1) Rents in our community are becoming increasing
unaffordable for the averagetenant.
2) Chula Vista’s homelesspopulation is at an all time high. 3) In the first year enforcement of the “Tenant Protection Ordinance” City Staff hasnot beenable levy a single fine against any Landlord or Tenant for violating provisions of the TPO.
4) Despite the seemingly lack of “Bad Actors”, City Staff insists on retaining the authority to levy $2,500.00 to 5,000.00 daily fines against reputable Landlords and
Tenants who make simple clerical errors. ( Seetext of
TPO Clauses 9.65.080C2 and 9.65.060E below)
5) With City Staff’s constant treat of substantial fines for inadvertent errors, prudent Landlords must raise rents in preparation of possible future fines.
6) It is not merely the fine which causes a rent increase but also the THREAT of a fine which triggers such an action. 7) This entire situation can be mitigated with the addition of the following simple clause to the “Tenant Protection
Ordinance”: “ Notice to cure must first be given before an administrative citation or civil penalty may be issued” 8) NOTHING in state law prohibits staff from issuing a
warning of non compliance.
Obviously the vast majority of good intention Tenants and Landlords would gladly correct the situation upon receiving a notification of non compliance, while the few unscrupulous individuals would attempt to circumvent the law. An added bonus of such a notification procedure is that a warning simplifies the processof identifying and levying fines against “Bad Actors”.
Remember!... the purpose of the “ Tennant Protection
Ordinance” is to protect tenants. It’s purpose is NOT to force an increase in rents caused the City Council’s delay in correcting obvious flaws in the TPO.
I am begging you to do your job. Please immediately instruct staff to correct this injustice and help those least fortunate of our community. Thank You.
Joseph17. Raso
Page2 of 5
PS: Staff Supplied Supporting Data:
A) Areas where we all can agree:
1) Threatening Landlords and Tenants who have made inadvertent mistakes with $5,000.00 daily fines is causing the most harm to tenants. Clause9.65.080C2: “Civil penaltiesfor violationsof this chapter_may be assessedat a rate not to exceed $5,000 per violation per day. Whena violation occurs it is not required that a warning or notice to cure must first be given before an administrative citation or civil penalty may be issued.” and clause at such time(s) and with such details. as shall be required by City iin the attendant Administrative Regulations. ‘ Translation: Tenant makes a mistake, Landlord getsa $5,000.00 daily fine.
2) Landlords of the *36,033 rental units (*Staff supplied data) must raiserentsin orderimpound funds to pay the potential finesof those who havemadeinadvertenterrors.
B) The City Council is probably unawarethat City Staff is not required receive Council’s direction when modifying The TPO’s Administrative Regulations:
City Staff is authorized to change rules at will regarding the enforcement of the “Tenant Protection Ordinance” without consulting The City Council. Most tenants who voluntarily move away may be unaware they may required to complete forms informing city staff the details of a relocation. SeeClause9.65.060E above. Such an absent of action a tenant’s part forces landlords to substantially raise rents in preparation of potential $ 5,000.00 daily fines to follow.
Page3 of 5
C) City Council waswarneda yearagotheTenantProtectionOrdinance would causea massiveincreasein homelessness. Although there are many causesfor homelessnessin our community, most can agree, high rentsis a hugecontributing factor. I canstateunequivocallyThe Tenant ProtectionOrdinanceis what is forcing this Landlord to raiserents.
D) Conclusions Drawn From City Staff Supplied Data:
1) Chula Vista Population: 283,972 ( Chula Vista - U.S. CensusBureau QuickFacts)
2) Averagenumberof individuals in eachhousehold: 3.31 (Chula Vista - U.S. CensusBureau QuickFacts)
3) Percentage Chula Vista housing which are rentals. 42% ( Data compiledby City Staff )
4) Number of ChulaVista RentalUnits: 36,033
Population of Chula Vista (283,072) divided by the averagenumberof people residing in each Residence (3.31) equals 85,792 multiplied the percentage of residences which are rentals ( 42%) equals the approximate number of Chula Vista rental units. ( 36,033) 5) Approximate numberof Chula Vista renters: 119,268 ( CVPopulation 283,972 x 42% = 119,268)
6) Approximate Average Monthly Chula Vista Rent: $3,047.00 ( See attached CV Staff provided “ Relocation Assistance” Pic below - Averageof Line 2ndfrom bottom)
7) With no right to cure, amount of daily fine levied if Landlord or Tenantinadvertently makes a paperwork error when Tenantterminates leaseand moves: $5,000.00 ( Clauses9.65.060 E and 9.65.080 C2 of Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance”’ )
8) Maxim averagemonthly rent increaseallowed . . $304.70 ($3047.00 x 10%. California AB-1482 5% plus inflation Max 10%)
9) Averagenumberof monthsrequiredfor Landlord to impound a 1 day fine: 16.41 ($5000.00 divided by $304.70)
10) $10,979,255.00: The approximate total monthly maximum rent increase levied on Chula Vista Renters if Landlords are forced to impound funds to the pay daily fines: ( 36,033 Rental Units multiplied by the 10% maxallowed rent adjustment $304.70 = $10,979,255 .00 ) 11) 596 New Homeless: Approximate number of Homelesscreatedif one half of one percent of Chula Vista renters are forced out of their homesby the rent increasescausedby the TenantProtectionOrdinance:
CV Population 283,972 x 42% = 119,268 x 5% = 596)
a ee ; STA | HOUSINGDIVISION Relocation Assistance
U.S. Departmentof Housing and UrbaAnca tia an Development Smallket Rent (April 2022) Greaterof: (1} 2 monthscontractedrentor 3
San Diego County, CAAdvisorySmallArea FMRsi re pei na hang “ dig iyUnitBedaacene or monthselderly/disabtedEfficienc 1 2 3 4y BedroomBedroomBedroomBedroom 91850 $ 2,040 $ 2,620 $ 3,640 $ 4,450 Exhibit2Ce — ae paren Comparison of Survey Data vs. SAEMR 1,440 $ 1,600 $ 2,050 $ 2,850 $ 3,490 r $2,110 $ 2,340 $ 3,000 $ 4,170 $ 5,100 2,360 $ 2,610 $ 3,350 $ 4,650 $ 5,700
2,360 $ 2,610 $ 3,350 $ 4,650 $ 5,700
1,925 $ 2,130 $ 2,733 $ 3,797 $ 4,648
1,802 $ 2,311 $ 3/210 $ 3,527
Page5 of 5