will have to pay the tenant the exorbitant move out fees anyway. She will also have to pay the city an annual fee.
This will seriously harm the home rental market and will drive up rents as fewer homes will be available.
From: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 11:21 AM
To: Ms. Bonnie <[email protected]>; City Clerk <[email protected]> Subject: RE: MY ONGOING CONCERN. REC'D THIS FROM ANNIE NOLEN WHO RECEIVED IT ON HER "NEIGHBORHOOD" AND FORWARDED IT TO ME!!
Thank you for your comments. Will you please forward the email from Ms. Rush that you are referring to.
Joelle Fockler, MMC | City Clerk
City of Concord | Website: www.cityofconcord.org
(925) 671-3390 | [email protected]
From: Ms. Bonnie <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 9:59 AM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]> Subject: Re: MY ONGOING CONCERN. REC'D THIS FROM ANNIE NOLEN WHO RECEIVED IT ON HER "NEIGHBORHOOD" AND FORWARDED IT TO ME!!
Importance: High
Just received this email from the City of Concord (Kelly Rush).
They seem to be in full damage control mode. Claiming the public has been subject to “ misinformation”?
The truth is Single Family Homes owned by individuals will (if the proposed regulations pass) be subject to new “just cause” eviction rules which do include up to $15,000 in moving expenses, new fees, and new reporting requirements. Regardless of what the lease says, the landlord will owe the tenant move out expenses should the landlord decide to reoccupy their home or sell it.
Grandma goes to a nursing home (hopefully temporarily) and rents her home out to keep it occupied and help her with expenses. The tenant wants a short term rental and is happy with the lease. She will have to pay the tenant the exorbitant move out fees anyway. She will also have to pay the city an annual fee.
This will seriously harm the home rental market and will drive up rents as fewer homes will be available.
I WOULD APPRECIATE A RESPONSE!!!!!!!!!!!!
From: Ingrid Maya <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 2:32 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed Ordinance Rent Stabilization and Just Cause Eviction 2/13/24 Council Meeting
To All Concord City Council:
I am a Concord resident and I recently learned about the proposed Ordinance regarding that is being considered regarding residential properties in Concord. I have expressed my dissatisfaction to Council members and the mayor regarding the Ordinance as presented for various reasons. Most of the Council members were courteous in responding acknowledgement of my email. I have not received a response from Council member Dominic Aliano. This serves to advise you that I object to the Ordinance as it is currently presented for the reasons detailed below.
The proposed Ordinance as worded poses a substantial deprivation of rights affecting residential property owners and the values of residential properties in Concord. The Ordinance as drafted creates rights in favor of tenants that result in a substantial interference and deprivation of an owner’s rights in the rental of a single-family residential home. An inherent right of property ownership is the right to exclude non-owners of the property from continuing to take possession after the expiration of a lease period. Page 5 of the 2/13/24 City of Concord Memorandum clearly points the following:
“Fixed term leases: If the tenant has a lease for a fixed period of time, the lease expires, and the property owner does not extend the lease, current State Law provides that the owner can file an unlawful detainer case without providing notice first.” If the landlord does not accept rent after the lease expires the lease under contract law is expired and there are no contractual duties by the landlord other than those of the tenant to vacate pursuant to an unlawful detainer. However Concord now attempts to create an additional duty upon the landlord despite the fact that there’s no contract (as the lease is expired) as follows:
“Concord’s draft ordinance would not allow an expiration of a lease alone to be a reason or “just cause” for terminating a tenancy; an at-fault or no-fault reason would need to be provided to terminate a tenancy.” To now create an additional duty to obtain your property back by requiring “an at-fault or no-fault reason” to terminate a tenancy goes above and beyond the right to contract and deemed to be an unlawful taking of property by the City of Concord. It creates a duty that is punitive in nature by then requiring the landlord to provide compensation to the tenant when in fact there is no “breach of contract “. A lease is a contract of definable terms and conditions and term specific. There is no expectation of “unlimited” renewal periods in a lease (unless the lease contains such a proviso) and the City of Concord in fact creates a lease of unlimited duration by establishing payments required to the tenant for relocation notwithstanding that there is no lease in effect after it has ended. These measures are punitive in nature to the landlord simply enacted to prevent the landlord from regaining his or her property after the lease period has ended. This among other sections of the Ordinance run a foul of property owner’s rights.
While property owners in Concord may not be currently renting their homes, the Ordinance will have a substantial impact on the values of their properties if the Ordinance is passed. It will diminish property values as properties become less favorable in light of the limitations imposed by the Ordinance. It also affects the rights of property owners now who are seniors and may need to rent their properties in the future if they require additional income to pay for assisted living or additional health care costs in the
years to come. More importantly, the Ordinance will create less rentals by creating the onerous conditions set forth under the eviction process. It will severely affect Concord’s ability to provide “more” housing.
Ingrid Maya
From: Mark and Faith Martinez <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 2:33 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Strongly Oppose New Rent Control/Unjust Eviction Ordinance
Please include the attached letter to tonight's Agenda material.
Thank you,
Mark and Faith Martinez
[email protected]
February 13, 2024
SUBJECT: Strongly Oppose New Rent Control/Unjust Eviction Ordinance Dear City of Concord Council Members:
My wife and I are the owner of two rental properties in Concord and we feel we are being unfairly grouped with property owners/landlords who are not fair to their tenants. We hear tenants have been unfairly evicted/rental prices are going up two times a year. We are fair landlords and have been in the past twenty years in Concord and can produce letters from our tenants who will vouch that we are good landlords. We don’t always increase our rent yearly. Sometimes we go three to four years without a rent increase.
We are senior citizens and this supplements our income as we are both retired. We can live with reasonable cap on the rent increase. It is the unfair amount on unjust evictions that would hurt and create a large financial burden on us and take away from us maintaining/improving our properties to the benefit of our tenants.
We are asking you to please reconsider the ordinance that is being proposed that puts unfair burden on landlords such as us. I’m sure there are many of us fair landlords in Concord that are being grouped with the unfair corporate landlords.
Sincerely,
Mark and Faith Martinez
From: John Okeefe <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 2:47 PM
To: Concord City Council Email <[email protected]> Subject: No To Rent control
Dear Mayor Birsan and Members of the City Council,
As Mom & Pop immigrants, who were proud to become America property owners, we are following the socialist based, but only against one section of society!! draconian, proposed rent ordinance.
Your own rent registries data, which you implemented, does not support this ordinance.!!!! So, we can only presume that this proposal, is a form of “grandstanding” to support your own flawed socialist leaning policies, which does nothing to increase rental housing availability.
Unfortunately, the Concord councils handling of the Concord Naval Weapons Base, housing conversion, reached a new level of incompetence, and will be long remembered for the councils lack of credibility, so, please, try not to make Concord, the butt of anymore jokes, the good people do not deserve it.
Our position is that the development of this disastrous ordinance has been predicated on false allegations that Concord housing providers gouge renters and terminate tenancies in mass numbers. Don’t ignore the fact that your own rent registry data shows that in 2022 rent increases were at or below the state-mandated rent cap outlined in the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, passed as AB 1482, and that 93.8% of tenancy terminations were due to renters voluntarily moving out and not due to an owner-initiated termination.
Flawed housing policy (rent control) is the reason why rents are high, not because housing providers are greedy.
The revised rent control ordinance has gone too far by capping rents so low that a housing provider will struggle to maintain the property, costs of maintenance and materials have gone up over 50%! If you must cap the rent increases, consider doing so in a fair manner.
Corporations and mom and pop landlords are not the same. For those of us who are very small businesses, please consider less stringent rent caps, at the very least to 5%!
The relocation fees are excessive and will deter housing providers from keeping their units in the rental market. The new attempt to require a percentage of ownership to constitute an owner move-in -- plus residency requirements and a 1:1 provision -- is more government overreach.
Your date does not lie, so, look at it again and be smart by encouraging rental housing to be built and do not subject Concord to a damaging housing environment that will ultimately shrink available housing and make rents higher.
Stephanie Bergin
From: Jean Claude (JJ) B. Mallein Jr. <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 2:59 PM
To: Concord City Council Email <[email protected]> Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>; Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Nakamura, Laura <[email protected]>
Subject: Rent Stabilization
Dear Mayor Birsan and City Council,
Ballot Initiative
First and foremost, given the magnitude of this decision and the undeniable impact to all Concordians, I propose that the Council send this to the ballot and let Concordians decide the future of their city.
Rent Cap
Is the Council even aware of the proposed rent cap based on the historical CPI? How can anyone stay in business let alone make a fair return when operating expenses are increasing double digits and rent increases are effectively capped at 1% to 2%. Meanwhile, minimum wage has increased on average 7.3% per year since 2018. Why are housing providers being penalized?
Money market accounts with no operating expenses and no risk are currently paying between
4.5% and 5%.
I believe that 3%-5% rent cap would be appropriate and reasonable and substantially eliminate fair return petitions absent capital improvement items.
Fair Return Petition
With the proposed rent cap, substantially every housing provider cannot make a fair return, but given the estimated cost of $5,000 to file a petition, I don’t know of any “mom and pop” owners that can even afford to do this, so the fair return petition is simply not an option. In addition, even if a fair return petition is approved it is still capped by the current rent cap of AB1482, so the amounts approved in the petition may take years to recover and will put many housing providers in jeopardy.
The fee for a Fair Return Petition should be “fair” and reasonable and should cover 2-3 years. Tenants are able to file their petitions for free, then so should housing providers, or at the most $100 for some skin in the game.
Rent Banking
I request that the Council include rent banking, otherwise this will guarantee annual rent increases since it’s a “use it or lose it” situation. Rent banking is good policy for tenants.
Rent Rollback
Even though rent stabilization was raised as a priority item at the January 12, 2023, there was no discussion let alone agreement on the rent cap formula, so it’s unconscionable to roll rents back to this date.
The Council should have voted on a “rent freeze” or on a “rent cap” during that meeting or at any other meeting. Instead, Council delayed until to December 12, 2023 to take the first vote on the rent cap. At a minimum, the ordinance should go into effect once it has been formally approved by Council, which has yet to occur. Even if Council insists on retroactively reducing “legal” rent increases, then Council should be estopped from rolling rents back prior to the formal vote on December 12, 2023.
Consider an Ordinance that will NOT Stifle Investment in Concord or Jeopardize Concords Aging Housing Stock
I encourage you to review Hayward’s Residential Rent Stabilization And Tenant Protection Ordinance, which strikes a “fair” balance between tenants and housing providers. Here’s the highlights
1. Rent cap of 5%
2. Landlord pass through of utility increases such as garbage, gas, electricity, and water (documentation to tenant required if more than 1%)
3. Capital improvement petition for improvements completed within 2 years
4. Rent banking not to exceed 10% (now subject to AB1482) and banking cannot exceed 10 years
In summary, I propose the following:
• Put rent stabilization on the ballot and let Concordians decide • If the Council insists on moving forward without Concordian support, then select an 3-5% fixed rent cap • Allow landlords to file a fair return petition for no cost or a “fair” and reasonable filing fee of $100 for up to 2-3 prior years.
• Add rent banking to the ordinance
• Make the ordinance effective once it’s formally approval by the Council, and if there is going to be a rent rollback, then roll it back to the first formal vote date of December 12, 2023.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
JJ Mallein
Housing Provider
Warning: This email, including any attachments, may contain confidential or privileged information and is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error, please do not retain, read, copy or disseminate any part of it and delete it from your computer. Please also notify the sender immediately by return message.
From: Barone, Valerie <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 3:20 PM
To: Supervisor Carlson <[email protected]>; City Clerk <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Rent Stabilization Affordable Housing Letter from Supervisor Carlson
Supervisor Carlson,
We will be sure it is added to the packet and Council receives it.
Valerie
Valerie Barone, City Manager (she/her/hers)
City of Concord | Website: www.cityofconcord.org
(925) 671-3150 | [email protected]
1950 Parkside Drive, MS/01, Concord, CA 94519
Subscribe to our City News e-newsletter to stay informed about what's happening in your community!
From: Supervisor Carlson <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 3:16 PM
To: Barone, Valerie <[email protected]>; City Clerk <[email protected]> Subject: Rent Stabilization Affordable Housing Letter from Supervisor Carlson
Dear Ms. Barone and Ms. Fockler,
Please see the attached letter from Supervisor Carlson regarding the impact of the rent stabilization ordinance on affordable housing and the County.
Sincerely,
The Office of Supervisor Carlson
Dear Mayor Birsan and Members of the City Council,
I am extremely concerned about your strict rent control proposal and urge you to vote no.
I maintain my position that the development of this disastrous ordinance has been predicated on false allegations that Concord housing providers gouge renters and terminate tenancies in mass numbers. Don’t ignore the fact that your own rent registry data shows that in 2022 rent increases were at or below the state-mandated rent cap outlined in the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, passed as AB 1482, and that 93.8% of tenancy terminations were due to renters voluntarily moving out and not due to an owner-initiated termination.
Your revised rent control ordinance has gone too far by capping rents so low that a housing provider will struggle to maintain the property. The relocation fees are excessive and will deter housing providers from keeping their units in the rental market.
The new attempt to require a percentage of ownership to constitute an owner move-in -- plus residency requirements and a 1:1 provision -- is more government overreach.
Please look at the data and reject this ordinance. Do not subject Concord to a damaging housing environment.
Thank You,
The following people submitted the above email:
1. Wali Fedaie
2. Anthony Freddie
From: east ocean <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 3:15 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>; Birsan, Edi <[email protected]>; Obringer, Carlyn <[email protected]>; Hoffmeister, Laura <[email protected]>; Nakamura, Laura <[email protected]>; Aliano, Dominic <[email protected]>
Subject: Email for Feb 13 Council Meeting: Rent Control Ordinance
Mayor Birsan and Concord City Councilmembers,
I have lived, worked, and voted in Concord for over 40 years. Once again, I am writing to express my continued opposition to your proposed legislation for rent control and 'just cause' provisions. As a homeowner and member of a small family run business, we have provided affordable housing to Concord residents for over 50 years.
As a result of the pandemic, our operating expenses have risen to unsustainable levels. Everything-- fire insurance, building materials, utilities, labor rates-- have increased many times over CPI. All of these costs have been absorbed but cannot be done so indefinitely. Our 'rainy day fund' has dried up. If you limit our ability to adjust rents to 60% CPI, we will be unable to cover these costs, much less perform needed maintenance and make capital improvements, and causing properties to degrade in quality. We also need to earn a fair rate of return: 5% plus CPI as stated in AB1482 allows us to stay in business and make a living.
We already pay business license, annual MFIP inspection, and rent registry fees. You now want to add an additional burden by implementing a rent board and hiring staff. Increasing rent registry fees to pay for this is not fair. If you are going to establish a rent board, then you should allow for some other provisions such as rent banking and pass-through for capital improvements. As they are currently written, your proposals are completely one-sided: you need to address the needs of housing providers as well as renters.
Your proposal for increased relocation fees are also burdensome for small housing providers. For those of us who charge rents below market rate, because we have long-term tenants and want to retain them, requiring us to pay up to four times the HUD FMR is onerous.
Your proposal to further restrict owner move-in is unreasonable. It is additional, overreaching legislation that will prevent housing providers from making necessary business decisions..
If your enact your proposed measures, we will go out of business. The property will likely be sold at a loss to large corporations that will demolish our older building in order to construct new ones and charge higher rents. In general. large corporations do not have the long history with or our commitment to the community as we do. The net effect will be to reduce the amount of available housing and renters Benched Correspondence Received
After 3:00 p.m. on February 13, 2024
Agenda Item No. 5.a
February 13, 2024
will have to relocate to other areas. You will actually be hurting the people you claim to help, as well as end our small business and the businesses that we support.
If you are serious about helping renters, you should aim to increase the amount of housing, not decrease it. This means that you should support small housing providers and make it easier for developers to build. Supporting small housing providers means reducing the amounts of city fees and restrictive laws, and allowing them to set rents to achieve a fair rate of return.
I ask you to reconsider implementing these damaging, short-sighted proposals and just keep those existing in AB1482. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Tammy Chen
From: chapmanengr <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 3:43 PM
To: Nakamura, Laura <[email protected]>
Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Senior Citizen Concern About Proposed Just Cause Eviction Ordinance
To: District 5 Councilmember Nakamura and other members of the City Council,
I am a senior citizen and a Concord resident for over 35 years. I own my small home. Although I have not ever rented it out, I have thought about leasing it for a six month to twelve month fixed period when I have my first grandchild so I can temporarily relocate and help care for the newborn. It appears that, should the proposed ordinance be passed as written, the law would require that I pay the tenant a $14,000 move out fee (2024 approximate cost) if the tenant unilaterally decides they do not want to move out by the date prescribed in a lease agreement.
I strongly oppose the inclusion of SFR units in the JUST CAUSE FOR EVICTION as it is a poison pill for a long term resident that desires to rent out their home for a fixed period and it is a huge financial slap in the face to anyone that desires to or needs to temporarily relocate and then return to their long term home in Concord.
It is my opinion that the 2023 STATE LAWS on rent control and eviction adequately protect tenants.
Layering additional City restrictions on rental property owners will result in a slowdown of construction of new rental housing in our City. The builders will go elsewhere to get a better return on investment.
Our city desperately needs to focus solely on getting new moderate and low income rental housing to market rather than scaring off individual SFR homeowners from renting their property.
Please do NOT approve the proposed ordinance.
Note: I only became aware that the ordinance would affect my property TODAY . You also need to do a better job at informing affected constituents!
Sincerely,
Patricia Chapman
From: Therese Schenk-McDonald <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 4:08 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Stop rent control Concord
City Clerk I am a single mom who has a few rentals in Concord. My tenants love me, I follow the rules and have long term tenants. They are like family to me!
If rent control goes in I will be forced to sell my property in Concord. It is unfair to the small property owner.
My tenants will tell you the same!
Therese Schenk
Owner
Sent from my iPhone
From: Mic <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 6:00 PM
To: Concord City Council Email <[email protected]> Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Vote no on rent control please. For each council member, and for the public website posting of the transcript and the video please.
Concord Council, All members,
I believe you posted a deceptive statement on the city of Concord page, stating in addition to city staff has learned that miss information about the ordinance is circulating within the community, and we want to clarify that single-family homes will not be subject to the proposed rent stabilization, provisions, Which seems deceptive because right below single-family homes are included in just cause for eviction.
The clause for eviction would apply to most rented units in Concord, including single-family homes and rented condominium units so in effect, but you’re voting on tonight will include single-family homes.
Why the deceptive paragraph above, not telling the whole story on the city of CONCORD webpage ? Why not put a paragraph above that says under just cause for eviction single-family home loaners could be subject to up to $15,000 in cost?
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 8:42 AM Concord City Council Email <[email protected]> wrote:
Thank you for your comments. They will be inserted into the record, posted to the website, and sent to the City Councilmembers for review prior to the February 13th meeting.
Wendy McAuley
Executive Assistant | Office of the City Manager & City Council City of Concord | www.cityofconcord.org
(925) 671-3038 | [email protected]
From: Mic <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 4:52 PM
To: Concord City Council Email <[email protected]> Subject: Vote no on rent control please. For each council member, and for the public website posting of the transcript and the video please.
Concord Council,
Please don’t bring this housing nightmare to the residents of Concord. Please watch this informative interview and post the video and the video transcript of a mom and pop housing provider who explains why they provide better housing at a lower cost to renters than government controlled housing.
Why any city that copies Oakland's failed policies will destroy good quality affordable housing provided by mom and pops long term below market rents in Concord. He explains why only lawyers and maybe a few individual renters would benefit from government controlled houses.
Also why is Concord such a good target for these lawfare type tactics (stealing of mom and pops money that provide good quality fair housing to the community of Concord)? Please read all the comments in the transcript of the video of the nightmare that the City of Oakland created, and save Concord from Government control;ed housing.
Thank you,
Long Term Mom and Pop Housing Provider
58,527 views Jan 13, 2024
Siyamak sits down with Tuan Ngo, a small-scale housing provider in Oakland. Today, he'll share with us the challenges mom-and-pop landlords currently face because of the widespread abuse of current housing laws and regulations in Oakland. We'll also discuss how this situation is impacting the relationship between small landlords and tenants and the affordable housing market. "Right now it costs $50,000 to $80,000 to evict a tenant. A lot of people still have not gotten rent.
Some people owe $30,000, $40,000, to $50,000 in back rent from the three-plus years during the moratorium. And the lawyers, they'll say your place was not habitable for the last few years. So they force you to settle to give up that rent, and then they want you to pay for the relocation fees and the rent in the new place for six months."
https://youtu.be/Z5GIq2PlWQw?si=wNxoBqSig8geNs6d
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 2:59 PM
To: Concord City Council Email <[email protected]> Subject: No to rent control
Dear Mayor Birsan and Members of the City Council,
As Mom & Pop immigrants, who were proud to become America property owners, we are following the socialist based, but only against one section of society!! draconian, proposed rent ordinance.
Your own rent registries data, which you implemented, does not support this ordinance.!!!!
So, we can only presume that this proposal, is a form of “grandstanding” to support your own flawed socialist leaning policies, which does nothing to increase rental housing availability.
Unfortunately, the Concord councils handling of the Concord Naval Weapons Base, housing conversion, reached a new level of incompetence, and will be long remembered for the councils lack of credibility, so, please, try not to make Concord, the butt of anymore jokes, the good people do not deserve it.
Our position is that the development of this disastrous ordinance has been predicated on false allegations that Concord housing providers gouge renters and terminate tenancies in mass numbers. Don’t ignore the fact that your own rent registry data shows that in 2022 rent increases were at or below the state-mandated rent cap outlined in the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, passed as AB 1482, and that 93.8% of tenancy terminations were due to renters voluntarily moving out and not due to an owner-initiated termination.
Flawed housing policy (rent control) is the reason why rents are high, not because housing providers are greedy.
The revised rent control ordinance has gone too far by capping rents so low that a housing provider will struggle to maintain the property, costs of maintenance and materials have gone up over 50%! If you must cap the rent increases, consider doing so in a fair manner. Corporations and mom and pop landlords are not the same. For those of us who are very small businesses, please consider less stringent rent caps, at the very least to 5%!
The relocation fees are excessive and will deter housing providers from keeping their units in the rental market. The new attempt to require a percentage of ownership to constitute an owner move-in -- plus residency requirements and a 1:1 provision -- is more government overreach.
Your date does not lie, so, look at it again and be smart by encouraging rental housing to be built and do not subject Concord to a damaging housing environment that will ultimately shrink available housing and make rents higher.
Cheryl okeefe
Concord Housing Provider
925-285-2511
6.a
6.b