Emeryville City Council
October 6, 2026

City of Emeryville Page 1 of 4
Members:

Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur
Vice Mayor Matthew Solomon
Council Member David Mourra
Council Member Kalimah A. Priforce
Council Member Courtney Welch

CITY OF EMERYVILLE
AGENDA

CITY COUNCIL
Emeryville City Hall
1333 Park Avenue
Emeryville, CA 94608
(510) 596-4300 phone
(510) 450-7831 fax
www.emeryville.org
Tuesday, October 06, 2026 6:00 PM - Special Meeting
7:00 PM - Regular Meeting Council Chambers
This meeting is being conducted in a hybrid model with both in-person and virtual attendance.

Join the meeting remotely using Zoom or in-person at
1333 Park Avenue, Emeryville, California
Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://emeryvilleorg.zoom.us/j/83106328670?pwd=I4UEuJQBwTgBQdeRzqPnzEBqJIfanA.ywLhTf0JSXdGNnuL Webinar ID: 831 0632 8670
Passcode: 695952
To request to speak during public comment, use the “raise hand” function in Zoom and wait for your name to be called.

To join by phone:

Telephone: 669-900-6833
Webinar ID: 831 0632 8670
Passcode: 695952
To request to speak during public comment, press *9 and listen for the last 4 digits of your phone number to be called. Press *6 to unmute your phone to speak.

Public comment can be submitted online via our written comment card at www.emeryville.org/citycouncil.

Written comments can also be submitted by email to [email protected] or to the City Clerk at [email protected]. If you would like to make public comment in writing, please send them by 3:00 p.m. prior to the meeting.

A complete copy of the agenda packet is available for viewing at the Information Center at City Hall, located at 1333 Park Avenue, Emeryville, California, and on the city’s website at www.emeryville.org/citycouncil. The meeting is shown live on the City of Emeryville television channel (ETV), cable channel 27, and will be rebroadcast according to the published ETV schedule of programs. Council meetings will also be available to view through live media streaming accessible from the City of Emeryville website at www.emeryville.org/citycouncil.

City Council AGENDA October 06, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 2 of 4
You can subscribe to receive Emeryville City Council agendas via email by going to our website at www.emeryville.org/citycouncil. Simply fill out your information, check “City Council Agendas”, and click the “Subscribe” button.

All matters listed under CONSENT CALENDAR are considered to be routine and will all be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown prior to the time the Council votes on the motion to adopt. Persons who wish to speak on matters set for PUBLIC HEARINGS will be heard when the Presiding Officer calls for comments from those persons who are in support of or in opposition thereto. After persons have spoken, the Hearing is closed and brought back to Council level for discussion and action. There is no further comment permitted from the audience unless requested by the Council.

No animals shall be allowed at or brought in to a public meeting by any person except (i) as to members of the public or City staff utilizing the assistance of a service animal, which is defined as a guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability; or (ii) as to police officers utilizing the assistance of a dog(s) in law enforcement duties.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, a person requiring an accommodation, auxiliary aid, or service to participate in this meeting should contact the City Clerk ’s Office at 510-596-4300, as far in advance as possible, but no later than 72 hours before the scheduled event. The best effort to fulfill the request will be made. Assistive listening devices are available for anyone with hearing difficulty from the City Clerk prior to the meeting and must be returned to the City Clerk at the end of the meeting.

Public Comment: Each speaker is limited to two minutes to present their comments to the City Council at each speaking opportunity. At the discretion of the Presiding Officer, time limits may be further adjusted.

The regular and special meetings of the Emeryville City Council also serve as regular or special meetings of the City of Emeryville as Successor Agency to the Emeryville Redevelopment Agency, the Community Development Commission, and the Public Finance Authority when items are listed on the agenda.

The City Council welcomes comments, including criticism, about the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the City, or of the acts or omissions of the City Council. Speakers shall not use threatening, profane, or abusive language which disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of a City Council or related meeting. The City is committed to maintaining a workplace free of unlawful harassment and is mindful that City staff regularly attend Council meetings. Discriminatory statements or conduct that would potentially violate the Fair Employment and Housing Act – i.e., statements or conduct that is hostile, intimidating, oppressive, or abusive – is per se disruptive to a meeting and will not be tolerated.

City Council AGENDA October 06, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 3 of 4

1. CALL TO ORDER - STUDY SESSION 6:00 PM

2. ROLL CALL

3. STUDY SESSION

3.1. TENANT PROTECTION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

4. ADJOURNMENT

1. CALL TO ORDER - REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM

2. ROLL CALL

3. APPROVAL OF FINAL AGENDA

4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY

4.1. CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF CITIES PRESENTATION OF THE HELEN PUTNAM AWARD FOR

EXCELLENCE IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THROUGH THE ARTS FOR THE ROTTEN

CITY CULTURAL DISTRICT PROGRAMS

4.2. PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE CELEBRATING FOLKMANIS PUPPETS ON THEIR 50TH ANNIVERSARY

4.3. PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE DESIGNATING OCTOBER 2026 AS ART AND CULTURE MONTH IN EMERYVILLE, CELEBRATING ARTS AND HUMANITY MONTH NATIONALLY, AND RECOGNIZING THE 40TH ANNIVERSARIES OF EMERYVILLE CELEBRATION OF THE ARTS AND THE 45TH STREET ARTISTS’ CO-OP

5. COUNCIL MEMBER SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS ON MEETING ATTENDANCE

6. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

7. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS

8. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR CONSENT AGENDA AND ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA

9. CONSENT CALENDAR

9.1. ALL ORDINANCES DEEMED READ BY TITLE ONLY AND ALL FURTHER READING WAIVED

9.2. ACTION MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 1, 2026, CITY COUNCIL MEETING

9.3. ACTION MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 15, 2026, CLOSED SESSION

9.4. ACTION MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 15, 2026, CITY COUNCIL MEETING

9.5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE ALLOWING THE

BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE, COMMISSION ON AGING, ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, HOUSING COMMITTEE, AND PARKS AND City Council AGENDA October 06, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 4 of 4

RECREATION COMMITTEE TO SET THEIR OWN REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULES, AND

TRANSFERRING PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE VACANCY APPOINTMENTS FROM THE

BUDGET AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES

COMMITTEE

9.6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING AND

ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE UNREPRESENTED COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS IN CONFORMANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLE 2, SECTION 570.5

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS

10.1. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING

SUBMITTAL OF A PROHOUSING DESIGNATION PROGRAM APPLICATION TO THE

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD)

11. ACTION ITEMS

12. DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS

12.1. ANNOUNCEMENT OF COMMISSION/COMMITTEE VACANCIES

12.2. Community Development Director’s Report on Planning Commission Actions at the August 27, 2026 meeting:
(a) Sutter Hospital Medical Center Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Scoping Session (PUD25-001). A public Scoping Session to accept comments from responsible agencies and the public about the scope of the EIR that will be prepared for the proposed Sutter Hospital Medical Center. This meeting gives the public and the Planning Commissioners an early opportunity to weigh in on the topics the Draft EIR should address, including traffic, air quality, noise, and other environmental issue areas.

The City of Emeryville, as CEQA Lead Agency, will issue a Notice of Preparation on August 14, 2026, opening a 30-day public review period during which written comments may also be submitted. The proposed project consists of a new 330-foot tall, 785,000 square foot hospital building; a new 55,600 square foot building for either medical office use or a 57-unit residential building; and conversion of two existing buildings to medical office uses totaling 563,200 square feet. General Plan Land Use Designation:

Office/Technology; Zoning Designation: PUD-3 (Applicant/Owner: Sutter Health) (APNs: 49-1558-2; -4;-5;-6; 49-1544-2;49-1041-29-1)
(b) Boot Barn Signage (SIGN26-007). A Major Sign Permit for one illuminated wall sign and three signs on the tower structure for Boot Barn at 3938 Horton Street, Suite 200.

CEQA Status: This project is exempt from environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15311(a) which applies to accessory structures including onpremise signs, and the “general rule” at Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposal may have a significant effect on the environment. General Plan Land Use Classification: Mixed-Use with Residential and Regional Retail Overlay. Zoning District: MUR Mixed Use with Residential, RR Regional Retail Overlay, and PP Pedestrian Priority Zone. (Applicant: David Ford/All Sign Services) (Owner: Benderson Development) (APN: 007-0617-022)

13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS

14. ADJOURNMENT
City of Emeryville

C A L I F O R N I A

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: October 6, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Chadrick Smalley, Community Development Director SUBJECT: TENANT PROTECTION POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation on, and provide direction to staff regarding, policy and programmatic recommendations to amend Chapter 40 (Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations) of Title 5 of the Emeryville Municipal Code.

BACKGROUND
On December 6, 2016, the City Council found and determined that regulating the relations between certain residential landlords and residential tenants would increase certainty and fairness within the residential rental market in Emeryville and thereby serve the public peace, health, safety and public welfare. As a result of this finding, the City Council adopted Ordinance 16-011, creating Chapter 40 (Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations) of Title 5 of the Emeryville Municipal Code with the purpose of formalizing and regulating the landlord-tenant relationship, specifically related to just cause eviction, antiharassment, and tenant relocation assistance.

On February 20, 2024, Councilmember Priforce requested a future agenda item to revisit rent control. The City Council voted to refer this item to the Budget and Governance Committee. On June 4, 2024, Councilmember Priforce requested a future agenda item on a Tenant’s Right to Organize ordinance and a Tenant’s Right to Counsel ordinance.

The City Council voted to refer these items to the Budget and Governance Committee.

Between March 2024 and December 2024, the Budget & Governance Committee and Housing Committee recommended staff (Phase 1):
• Develop a Tenants’ Right to Organize policy,
• Modify the Just Cause and No-Fault restrictions, Relocation Assistance payment requirements and Right to Return clause to add additional clarity • Amend the Anti-Harassment restrictions
Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

In February 2025, the City was awarded a Transit-Oriented Communities (“TOC”) Implementation Planning Grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (“MTC”) to assist the City in adopting at least two tenant protection policies (Just Cause/No Fault and Anti-Harassment), consistent with MTC’s TOC Policy. With the funds from the TOC grant, the City contracted with PlaceWorks, Inc. to assess other jurisdictions’ tenant protection ordinances, analyze 3-day notice trends in Emeryville, conduct community outreach with housing advocates, landlords and tenants, and develop Phase 1 policy recommendations.

Subsequently, in June 2025 and October 2025, the City Council and the Budget & Governance Committee directed staff to work with the Housing Committee to (Phase 2):
• Develop a Tenant Relocation Assistance Program
• Investigate updating the definition of large and small landlords within the Relocation Assistance policy
With the Phase 1 work already underway with PlaceWorks, staff researched other local tenant relocation assistance policies and how other jurisdictions define and distinguish landlords, and developed Phase 2 policy recommendations.

DISCUSSION
Eviction Process & Trends
California's eviction process for residential tenancies involves three distinct stages. First, a landlord seeking to terminate a tenancy must serve a written notice, commonly a 3-day notice to pay rent or quit, or to cure or quit, specifying the violation and the period within which the tenant may remedy it. This notice is served directly by the landlord and does not require court involvement or authorize removal of the tenant from the unit. Under the Emeryville Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance, the landlord must also provide a copy of the notice to the City.

If the tenant does not comply within the notice period, the landlord may file an unlawful detainer action, which is a civil proceeding through which the landlord seeks a court judgment for possession of the unit. The tenant retains the right to respond and, absent resolution, the matter proceeds to trial on a timeline that is expedited relative to standard civil litigation. Should the landlord prevail, the court issues a judgment for possession and a writ of possession. Only the county sheriff is authorized to execute this writ, which constitutes an eviction (i.e., the physical removal of the tenant if they have not vacated voluntarily).

Between January 2022 and July 2025, the City received 2,108 notices of termination. Of these, 95.9% were issued for failure to pay rent or utilities. The average amount of rent owed was $2,600.58; the highest amount owed was $49,176.95 and the lowest was $20.

During the same period, Alameda County identified 401 unlawful detainer filings against Emeryville tenants. As shown in Chart 1 below, the City receives significantly more notices of termination each month than there are unlawful detainers filed in Alameda County Superior Court. This difference suggests that, after receiving a notice, many Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

tenants may have cured the lease violation, entered a payment plan, reached a mediated settlement with their landlord, or moved out voluntarily to avoid an unlawful detainer filing.

Data is not available as to which of these outcomes occurred as there is not a requirement for landlords to report the outcome of an issued notice of termination.

Chart 1: Notice of Termination & Unlawful Detainers
Only 12 of the 2,108 notices of termination were issued for “no fault” reasons; half of these (6) cited owner move-in. Staff also found that 64.8% of the termination notices contained one or more errors (i.e. missing information, rental agreement not attached), with the most common error related to a missing rental agreement.

Outreach
Between October 2025 and January 2026, PlaceWorks interviewed stakeholders from tenant advocacy groups, legal aid organizations, and property management entities, and conducted an online survey of tenants and landlords to gather feedback on evictions, fair housing, and the Emeryville Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance. A total of 127 people participated in the online survey, including 76 Emeryville tenants, 23 landlords, and 28 others (former Emeryville tenants, non-Emeryville residents, eviction advocates, etc.). Key findings from the tenant survey include:
• 85.5% of tenants identified that they had not accessed any type of tenant-landlord counseling, “know your rights” trainings, or legal-aid services within the past three years;
• 26% of tenants had experienced harassment from their landlords, with withholding or threatening to withhold repairs as the most common type of harassment; • 7.6% of tenants had received notice of termination of tenancy in the last three years; and
• 14.4% of tenants experienced temporary displacement within the past three years due to repairs to their unit.
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
January 2022
February 2022
March 2022
May 2022
June 2022
July 2022
August 2022
September 2022
October 2022
November 2022
December 2022
January 2023
February 2023
March 2023
April 2023
May 2023
June 2023
July 2023
August 2023
September 2023
October 2023
November 2023
December 2023
January 2024
February 2024
March 2024
April 2024
May 2024
June 2024
July 2024
August 2024
September 2024
October 2024
November 2024
December 2024
January 2025
February 2025
March 2025
April 2025
May 2025
June 2025
July 2025
Count of Eviction Notices Count of Unlawful Detainers
Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Key findings from the property manager interviews and surveys include:
• 78.3% of property managers have not accessed tenant-landlord counseling, “know your rights” trainings, or legal-aid services within the past three years; • 52.1% of property managers stated that FAQs or fact sheets on the Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance on the City website would be a helpful resource for them;
• 65% of property managers indicated that, other than for past-due rent, they had not issued notices of termination for any “for cause” reason in the past three years.

Policy Recommendations
The policy recommendations that staff requests the City Council consider as amendments to Chapter 40 (Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations) of Title 5 (Public Welfare) of the Emeryville Municipal Code are organized into the following topic areas:
• General
• For Cause Terminations
• No Fault Terminations
• Short-Term Relocation (new)
• Relocation Assistance
• Anti-Harassment and Other Prohibited Activities
• Tenants’ Right to Organize (new)
• Civil Remedies
• Notice of Tenant Rights
• Government Order to Vacate (new)
General Policies
The following general policy amendments relate to the definitions section of the ordinance (i.e., Section 5-40.02, Definitions).

General Policy-1 Clarify that Live/Work units are covered dwelling units Why do this? There are 203 Live/Work units in Emeryville. Title 9 recognizes a “Live/Work Unit” as a distinct commercial use type that accommodates residential occupancy while Chapter 6-4
specifically includes Live/Work in the definition of dwelling unit.

Because Chapter 5-40 does not cross-reference the term
“dwelling unit,” tenants and landlords have been uncertain as to whether this type of unit is covered.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Oakland
Recommendation Explicitly identify live/work units as covered units and clarify that a unit remains covered as long as someone resides in it as a primary residence, even if it is zoned or permitted with a commercial or industrial component.

Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

General Policy-2 Revise definition of small and large landlord Why do this? Unit count was originally used to protect landlords with limited resources; however, it is an insufficient proxy for determining an landlord’s financial capacity to pay relocation assistance.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
San Diego, LA County
Recommendation (a) Exclude landlords that are a real estate investment trust (REIT), a corporation, or a limited liability company (LLC) in which at least one member is a corporation from the definition of a small landlord. (b) Add landlords that are a REIT, a corporation, or a limited liability company in which at least one member is a corporation to the definition of a large landlord, regardless of unit count.

For Cause Terminations (5-40.03)
Under the existing ordinance, a landlord may issue a notice of termination of tenancy if the landlord can show that one or more of the ten circumstances listed in Section 5-

40.03(e)(1) has occurred due to the tenant’s actions.

For Cause Policy-1 Set a Minimum Amount for Non-Payment of Rent or Utility Payment
Why do this? 2,021 notices of termination were issued for non-payment of rent/utilities between January 2022-July 2025; 635 of those notices were for less than $1,000. Setting a minimum unpaid-rent threshold can prevent evictions over nominal amounts.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, Berkeley, Oakland Recommendation Nonpayment of rent or utilities must be equal to or greater than one month's fair market rent based on number of bedrooms, as determined by HUD, to issue a notice of termination.

For Cause Policy -2 Revise Occupancy Violation Requirements Why do this? Ordinance currently permits at-fault eviction where a tenant allows a long-term occupancy of an individual not included in the lease when it would cause the # of persons to exceed the occupancy requirement of 2 persons per bedroom +1. This could result in households with children being displaced. Additionally, tenants sometimes need to replace a departing tenant during the lease, which can expose tenants to at-fault eviction if a landlord rejects a qualified tenant as a pretext to eviction.

Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
West Hollywood, Larkspur, Half Moon Bay
Recommendation (a) Prohibit at-fault eviction of households with children under 18 based on exceeding occupancy limits. (b) Clarify that landlords have the right to approve replacement tenants based on
reasonable criteria provided by the City.

For Cause Policy -3 Require Evidence of Material Damage Why do this? Prevents pretextual termination notices for minor infractions that could be resolved without the threat of eviction. Many Emeryville tenants are on month-to-month tenancies, and landlords
sometimes change building policies or lease terms without the tenant's written acknowledgment. Tenants may not know a new rule exists until they receive a termination notice for violating it.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Oakland, West Hollywood, Berkeley
Recommendation (a) Require the landlord to have evidence of demonstrable injury to the landlord or other residents. (b) A tenant may not be evicted for violating a lease term or rental policy that was added or changed after the tenancy began unless the tenant accepted the change in writing, or the change is required by law. (c) A tenant's refusal to sign a new or changed term may not be grounds for termination. (d) Require landlords to provide written notice of any change in lease terms or rental policies, and to keep a record that the notice was delivered.

No Fault Terminations (5-40.03)
A landlord may issue a notice of termination of tenancy if the landlord can show that one or more of the four circumstances listed in Section 5-40.03(e)(2) has occurred through no fault of the tenant. A tenant who receives a no-fault notice of termination is entitled to relocation assistance and the right to return to the unit if it is returned to the rental market, on substantially the same material terms.

No Fault Policy - 1 Clarify the term “Imminently” for removal from rental market Why do this? “Imminently” is not currently a defined term in the City ordinance.

There is currently no way for a tenant or the City to determine whether a landlord violated the ordinance by failing to remove the unit from the rental market or demolish it “imminently,” which affects both when the tenant must vacate and when the right to return is triggered.

Peer Jurisdictions//
State Law
Civil Code 1946.2
Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Recommendation Require the landlord to identify why the unit is being removed from the market in the termination notice;
No Fault Policy - 2 Clarify the term “Imminently” for Landlord Move-in Why do this? “Imminently” is not currently a defined term in the City ordinance.

There is currently no way for a tenant or the City to determine whether an landlord (or qualifying family member) violated the ordinance by not moving in, which could trigger the right-to-return requirement.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Concord (monitors), Berkeley (monitors), Oakland, Civil Code 1946.2
Recommendation (a) Require the landlord (or qualifying family member) to move in within 90 days of the end of the terminated tenant's tenancy. (b) Require the landlord (or qualifying family member) to provide evidence to the City that the move-in was completed within the required period.

No Fault Policy - 3 Define Required 50% Stake for Owner Move-In Why do this? The 50% ownership requirement currently resides in regulations rather than the ordinance itself; codifying this requirement improves clarity for both landlords and tenants. SB 567 (2023), effective April 1, 2024, clarified that a landlord must have at least 25% ownership interest to pursue an owner move-in termination.

The City’s current regulation is more protective of tenants than state law.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
West Hollywood, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Concord (25%)
Recommendation Clarify that an owner must have a 50% ownership stake in the property to pursue a no-fault termination for owner move-in.

No Fault Policy - 4 Include Spouse, Domestic Partner and Beneficiary of a Family Trust as Eligible for Owner Move-In
Why do this? Emeryville’s Ordinance limits owner move-in evictions to the landlord, their parents, or their children. Many other jurisdictions also include a landlord’s spouse, domestic partner, grandparent, grandchild or a beneficiary of a family trust. This recommendation would make the ordinance more inclusive of diverse family types and living circumstances.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Concord, Oakland, Larkspur, Half Moon Bay, Berkeley, Civil Code 1946.2
Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Recommendation (a) Add spouse, domestic partner, and beneficiary of a family trust (i.e., a revocable or irrevocable living trust) as permitted family members for an owner move-in. (b) Permitted
beneficiaries of a family trust shall comply with Civil Code 1946.2(b)(2)(A)(viii)(IV). (c) Require the landlord to identify in the termination notice who the intended occupant is and their relationship to the owner.

No Fault Policy - 5 Limit the Number of Owner Move-In Evictions Why do this? To prevent abuse of no-fault evictions due to owner move-in and minimize tenant displacement.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley (1), San Francisco (1)
Recommendation Limit the number of no-fault evictions due to owner move-in that can occur per parcel within a five-year period, regardless of ownership.

No Fault Policy -6 Eliminate Unfit for Human Habitation as a No-Fault Eviction and create a new section on Government Order to Vacate
(see below)
Why do this? Unfit for human habitation is a habitability standard in Civil Code 1941.1 that describes what is wrong with the unit and does not by itself obligate or trigger a government order to vacate. Unfit for human habitation is invoked between a landlord and tenant or in court, and requires no government inspection, findings, or action by the City. A government order to vacate is a procedural action that is based on an inspection, findings, and a
discretionary decision that the condition rises to the level of requiring an occupant to leave. Civil Code 1946.2 allows a nofault termination only when the landlord intends to comply with a government or court order, or a local ordinance, that requires vacating the property.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley, Concord, City of Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Civil Code 1946.2
Recommendation Remove unfit for human habitation as a no-fault eviction. Create a new section of the ordinance on Government Orders to Vacate, using the language in Civil Code 1946.2. Allow a no-fault termination only to comply with (a) an order issued by a government agency or court relating to habitability that necessitates vacating the residential property, (b) an order issued by a government agency or court to vacate the residential Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

property, or (c) a local ordinance that necessitates vacating the residential property.

No Fault Policy - 7 Clarify substantially renovated, demolished and temporarily removed from rental market
Why do this? Provide additional clarity regarding the type of substantial renovation work and the minimum amount of time a tenant must be relocated to receive a No-Fault termination of tenancy notice and qualify for permanent relocation. Civil Code 1946.2 requires a minimum of 30 consecutive days to qualify for a no-fault eviction. This also helps distinguish the type of relocation assistance the tenant qualifies for.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley (30 days), Concord (30 days)
Recommendation (a) Define substantial renovation as structural, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical work requiring a permit, or hazardous material abatement (e.g., lead, mold, asbestos), that cannot be safely completed with the tenant in place. Excludes tenantcaused conditions, cosmetic work, work safely performed without vacating, and natural disaster damage. (b) Relocation must be for 30 consecutive days or more (i.e. extended relocation). (c) Require landlord to provide a copy of the demolition permit when they issue the termination notice; (c) Require the landlord to start demolition of the unit within 90 days of the end of the terminated tenant’s tenancy.

Short Term Relocation (NEW)
Emeryville's existing Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance, together with state law (Civil Code 1946.2), establishes protections for permanent no-fault terminations of tenancy. Neither framework, however, addresses situations where a tenant is temporarily displaced from a unit while their tenancy continues and the tenant retains the right to return to their unit. Without defined obligations, this gap creates a risk that temporary displacement becomes permanent, even though it was never initiated as a nofault termination.

Short Term
Relocation Policy -
1 Define events that trigger Short Term Relocation and length of Short-Term Relocation
Why do this? The existing ordinance only covers tenants who receive a nofault termination notice for substantial renovation. It has no mechanism to protect tenants whose tenancy is not terminated but who cannot safely remain in their unit while repairs are done.

Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

This policy would establish the situations covered when a tenant must be out of the unit for 2-29 days.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Oakland (disability related access), Culver City (fumigation), Civil Code 1941.1 (Lack of access to bathroom/kitchen), San
Francisco (30 days), Concord (30 days)
Recommendation Require short-term relocation assistance when a tenant must vacate for 2-29 days due to one or more of the following events:
(1) substantial renovation; (2) loss of bathroom or kitchen access; (3) fumigation; or (4) a disability-related access barrier. Exclude cosmetic repairs, natural disasters, conditions caused by the tenant or the tenant’s guest, and work that can be completed while the tenant remains in the unit.

Relocation Assistance (5-40.04)
Under the current ordinance, a landlord must provide relocation assistance when a tenant receives a no-fault notice of termination. If the ordinance is expanded to include a shortterm relocation policy, additional provisions will be needed to define landlords’ relocation assistance obligations.

Relocation Policy –
1 Distinguish relocation assistance benefits based on the number of days a tenant is relocated
Why do this? The benefits a tenant receives should reflect the number of days the tenant is expected to be relocated from the unit.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Concord (Per Diem); Hayward (3X FMR prorated)
Recommendation Tier 1: Relocated 2-5 days; landlord pays tenant based on General Services Administration (GSA) per diem lodging rates for the Emeryville/Oakland area, prorated per day displaced; households 5+ receive lodging for 2 rooms; meals per diem provided per household member; pet boarding, if applicable Tier 2: Relocated 6-29 days; Landlord provides comparable housing or pays prorated amount per day based on 3X FMR (Large Landlord) and 2X FMR (Small Landlord); pet boarding, if applicable; moving/storage costs reimbursed, if applicable Tier 3: Relocated 30+ days; increase the Small Landlord requirement from the greater of 1X FMR or 1X current rent to the greater of 2X FMR or 2X current rent; no change to the Large Landlord relocation payment
If the relocation period exceeds the number of days originally indicated, the tenant is entitled to the next tier of benefits; however, the landlord may deduct any payment provided under the previous tier from the new amount due.

Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Relocation Policy –
2 Comparable Housing
Why do this? Define what qualifies as comparable housing to be provided by a landlord under Tier 2.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Concord, Alameda, Berkeley, City of Los Angeles
Recommendation Located within 5 miles of Emeryville; if provided in the same complex, it must have a similar bedroom/bathroom count; if a hotel/motel is provided, the room must have 2 queen beds for households of 2-4, and a second room must be provided for larger households; if external rental housing is provided, it must have a similar bedroom/bathroom count.

Relocation Policy –
3 Other Relocation Benefits under Tier 2
Why do this? When temporary relocation is triggered, it is due to a condition that was not caused by the tenant. If moving or storage expenses are required because of that condition, the landlord should have the financial responsibility for those incurred costs and not the tenant. Additionally, if the household has a dog or cat and the comparable housing does not allow pets, the landlord shall be responsible for boarding the dog or cat.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley, Oakland, Alameda
Recommendation (a) Tenants required to remove and/or store their personal belongings during the relocation period are entitled to reimbursement of reasonable moving and storage costs for moving items out of and back into the unit; (b) if a household has a dog or cat and the comparable housing does not allow pets, the landlord shall reimburse the tenant for reasonable pet boarding costs during the relocation period.

Relocation Policy –
4 Require Earlier Payment of Tier 3 (30+ Days) Relocation Assistance
Why do this? Ensures the landlord is aware of the relocation requirement, provides the tenant with funds before moving out to help cover moving expenses, and gives the tenant a defense to a no-fault eviction if payment is not made before the last day of tenancy.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Oakland (50% at notice, 50% at move-out), Berkeley (100% within 10 days)
Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Recommendation Require that at least 50% of relocation assistance be paid within 15 days of delivering the notice to terminate tenancy, with the remaining 50% paid by the last day of tenancy.

Relocation Policy –
5 Require Advance Payment of Tier 1 and Tier 2 Relocation Assistance
Why do this? Ensure tenants have funds before moving out to cover lodging and moving expenses that require upfront payment.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley (10 days), San Francisco (4 days), San Mateo (5 days) Recommendation (a) Landlord shall pay relocation assistance to the tenant 7 days prior to vacancy; (b) if vacancy must occur in less than 7 days, payment is due upon vacancy; (c) payment shall be divided amongst all tenants occupying the rental unit equally among all tenants age 18 or older on the lease.

Anti-harassment and Other Prohibited Activities (5-40.05) The ordinance prohibits landlords from taking certain enumerated actions in bad faith, with ulterior motive, or without honest intent. Staff recommends prohibiting the following additional actions:

Anti-Harassment
Policy – 1
Expand Anti-harassment behavior
Why do this? Ensures tenants can live in their homes without fear of harassment or retaliation from their landlord.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Culver City, TOC Policy
Recommendation Add: (1) knowingly violating any law that prohibits discrimination; (2) making sexual demands or engaging in other actions that create a hostile environment; (3) requesting information or documentation on immigration or citizenship status, unless required by federal law; (4) repeatedly mistreating an occupant with language that a reasonable person would consider likely to cause fear or provoke violence; and (5) interfering with a tenant’s right to organize.

Tenants’ Right to Organize (NEW)
Tenant organizing is often necessary to secure improved conditions when owners, landlords, or responsible agencies fail to comply with their obligations. Without legal protections for organizing, tenants who organize may face retaliation from landlords, such as rent increases, harassment, or other mistreatment. Staff recommends the following Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

policies to expand tenant protections and strengthen tenants’ position within the landlordtenant relationship.

Tenant Organizing
Policy – 1
Define Eligible Properties and Threshold to Form a Tenant Association
Why do this? Establishes parameters for tenants to form a Tenant Association that is recognized by the landlord.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley, San Francisco
Recommendation (1) Eligible properties include those with 5 or more rental units are eligible
(2) Threshold to establish a formal Tenant Association: (a) tenants in at least 50% of the occupied rental units within the property must sign a petition certifying their desire to establish a Tenant Association and provide it to the landlord; (b) landlordoccupied and property management units are excluded when calculating the 50% threshold; (c) the landlord may request recertification of the Tenant Association once every three years.

Tenant Organizing
Policy -2
Tenant Protected Activities and Landlord Obligations
Why do this? Ensures tenants can freely communicate with each other and the landlord without fear of harassment or retaliation.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley, San Francisco
Recommendation Tenant protected Activities: (a) Distribute or post literature; (b) confer with other tenants; (c) hold regular meetings open to residents of the property; (d) engage with third-party
organizations for support in tenant organizing;
Landlord Obligations: (a) require landlords and tenant
associations to confer in good faith regarding landlord policies, rent, habitability, and common area concerns; and (b) place the burden of proof on the landlord to show that retaliation has not occurred.

Civil Remedies (5-40.06)
This section of the ordinance authorizes tenants and the City to bring civil actions to enforce the terms, rights, and obligations of the Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance. Staff recommends the following policies to add clarity and provide additional support for tenants who need to bring a civil action:

Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Civil Remedies
Policy - 1
Define Minimum Damages
Why do this? Incentivizes private attorneys to represent tenants in lawsuits related to eviction.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Larkspur, West Hollywood, Concord, Oakland, Berkeley,
Healdsburg
Recommendation A landlord who wrongfully attempts to recover possession of a unit may be liable for damages of not less than three times actual damages, plus any other relief the court deems appropriate; a prevailing tenant would be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and court costs.

Civil Remedies
Policy - 2
Provide Defense for Households with School Age Children Why do this? Limits displacement for households with school-age children during the school year.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Oakland (children), Concord (children), Half Moon Bay (children) Recommendation Provide households with school-age children enrolled in an inperson school with a defense against no-fault eviction during the Emeryville Unified School District (EUSD) school year.

Civil Remedies
Policy - 4
Make Filing a Notice of Termination with the City a Condition of Eviction
Why do this? The ordinance currently requires landlords to file notices of termination with the City, but failure to file does not invalidate the notice. This limits the City’s ability to monitor terminations and enforce the ordinance.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Newark
Recommendation Require the landlord to file the notice of termination with the City in a form prescribed by the City and make failure to comply an affirmative defense to eviction.

Notice of Tenant Rights (5-40.07)
Section 5-40.07 currently requires landlords to give tenants a written notice of their rights using language set out in the ordinance. The following recommendations would create a city-prescribed tenants' rights notice and expand the information it covers, so tenants and landlords get clear, consistent and current information about their rights and responsibilities.

Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Noticing Policy – 1 Provide City-Prescribed Tenants’ Rights Notice Why do this? Ensures all tenants receive the same tenants' rights notice, improves access for tenants with limited English proficiency, and keeps information current.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco, West Hollywood
Recommendation (a) Provide a required City-prescribed tenants' rights notice (rather than mandatory language only); (b) provide notice forms in English, Spanish and any other language required under the CDBG language access plan for Emeryville; and (c) update available tenant resources annually.

Noticing Policy - 2 Expand Required Text in Notice of Tenants' Rights Why do this? Helps tenants improve their awareness of their rights.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco
Recommendation (a) Add language to the notice of tenants' rights stating that tenants can organize, are protected from harassment, and can bring a civil action in court, and add contact information for available support services; and (b) require landlords to obtain the tenant’s written acknowledgment of receipt of the notice.

Noticing Policy - 3 Short Term Relocation Noticing Requirements Why do this? Ensures all tenants are aware of the short-term relocation policy and applicable benefits
Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Hayward
Recommendation (1) Initial Notice: Require landlords to provide notice of short-term relocation rights to all existing tenants within 120 days of ordinance adoption, and to all new tenants upon lease execution; (2) Prior to Relocation: (a) Require landlords to provide tenants with written notice of a triggering short-term relocation event, including a summary of the repairs to be undertaken, the estimated duration of the work, and the proposed re-occupancy date; (b) require tenants to sign an acknowledgment of receipt; if a tenant does not sign within 5 business days, the landlord may certify under penalty of perjury that the information was provided. (3) Right to Return: Require landlords to provide tenants with written notice at least 7 days before the date the unit will be ready for re-occupancy. The notice must state the re-occupancy date and confirm the tenant's right to return to the unit on the same Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

terms and conditions as before the relocation. If the reoccupancy date changes, the landlord must promptly provide an updated written notice, and relocation benefits continue until the unit is ready.

Government Order to Vacate (NEW)
A government order to vacate can displace tenants suddenly and with little notice, but the current ordinance addresses it only through the "unfit for human habitation" no-fault provision, which requires a no-fault eviction notice to be issued by the landlord. A new section would align the ordinance with state law, remove the requirement for a no-fault eviction notice to be issued, clarify how fault is determined, what relocation benefits are owed and when, how tenants return to their units, and how the City can step in when a landlord fails to pay. Staff recommend the following:

Government Order
Policy -1
Define a Government Order to Vacate
Why do this? California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 17975 et seq. establishes relocation requirements when a government order to vacate is issued. The City’s ordinance should be updated to align with state law.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
HSC 17975
Recommendation (1) Define a government order to vacate as a city, agency, or court-ordered vacate notice, red tag, or substandard housing determination. (2) At the time the order to vacate is issued, the City shall determine whether a tenant or tenant’s guest caused or substantially contributed to the condition that resulted in the order. (3) If a tenant is found at fault, or if the damage was caused by a natural disaster, the landlord is not responsible for relocation benefits.

Government Order
Policy -2
Relocation Benefits
Why do this? Comply with HSC 17975 regarding relocation benefits under a government order to vacate.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
HSC 17975, Hayward
Recommendation Landlord is required to provide a tenant with: (a) two months of Fair Market Rent; (b) utility service deposit, as determined by the City; (c) return of the tenants’ security deposit; (d) if a tenant is to be displaced for more than 29 days, the tenant is eligible to Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

receive the greater of the government order relocation benefit or the Tier 3 relocation benefit.

Government Order
Policy -3
Payment Timing
Why do this? Comply with HSC 17975 regarding relocation benefits under a government order to vacate.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
HSC 17975
Recommendation (a) Relocation payment must be made within 10 days of the vacate order or 20 days before the scheduled vacate date, whichever is later; (b) if the landlord fails to pay on time, the tenant shall be owed 1.5 times the relocation amount, except when payment is due within 10 days of the order; (c) if the vacate order provides less than 10 days to vacate, payment must be made within 24 hours; (d) the City may advance the relocation payment to the tenant if the City adopts a policy and establishes funding for this purpose (see Government Order Policy-5).

Government Order
Policy -4
Noticing Requirements
Why do this? Comply with HSC 17975 regarding relocation benefits under a government order to vacate and provide tenants with a right to return to their unit once unit is deemed habitable by the City.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
HSC 17975
Recommendation Initial - City shall provide notice of government order to vacate requirements to landlord and tenant
Right to Return – Once the City deems the unit habitable, the landlord shall provide the tenant with written notice of the right to return within 7 days if displacement was less than 30 days, or within 30 days if displacement was between 30 days and 24 months.

Government Order
Policy -5
City-Sponsored Relocation Payment
Why do this? Provide relocation assistance to tenants subject to a government order to vacate, when the landlord fails to issue payment. The City has set aside $15,000 in Operation Dignity’s service contract to develop program guidelines and to pilot an Imminent Need Emergency Housing Support program to assist those
Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

households and families in imminent risk of becoming homeless due to a government order to vacate with short term financial assistance.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
HSC 17975
Recommendation (a) Adopt a policy that allows the City to issue relocation assistance to tenants subject to a government order to vacate when the landlord fails to pay
Government Order
Policy -6
Enforcement
Why do this? Comply with HSC 17975 regarding relocation benefits under a government order to vacate.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
HSC 17975
Recommendation (a) The City shall be entitled to recover from the landlord a penalty equal to one-half of the amount paid to the tenant, not to exceed $10,000; (b) the City shall also be entitled to recover its actual direct and indirect costs of administering the payment to the tenant; (c) the City shall provide an administrative appeal process for landlords disputing amounts owed to the City; and (d) if an landlord fails to reimburse the City, the City may impose a lien on the property for the amount owed.

Rent Registry (NEW)
The City currently receives data on residential tenancies only through the notices of termination that landlords file with the City. It has no citywide information on how many rental units exist, who owns them, what tenants pay, or how tenancies begin and end.

Without this information, the City cannot fully understand Emeryville's rental market or track trends in displacement. It is also difficult to administer the ordinance, and to reach every landlord and tenant with notices and resources. Staff recommend the following:

Rent Registry -1 Enforcement
Why do this? The City currently has no inventory of rental units or landlords, so it learns of potential violations only when a tenant complains or a landlord files a notice. A registry would allow the City and give limited information to identify unfiled termination notices, confirm that owner move-ins and returns to the rental market comply with the ordinance, apply the large/small landlord definitions, and send required notices to all rental owners.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Oakland, Berkeley, San Francisco, Alameda, Richmond, City of Los Angeles, Concord, Newark
Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Recommendation (a) Require landlords of covered units to register each rental unit with the City annually. (b) Registration would include property address, unit count, unit size (bedrooms/bathrooms), owner and property manager contact information, ownership type (for the large/small landlord definitions in General Policy-2), and occupancy status. (c) Landlords must update the registration within 30 days of a change in ownership or property
management.

Rent Registry -2 Registration Fee and Compliance
Why do this? An annual fee would pay for the registry and help cover the cost of administering the ordinance. Tying compliance to eviction rights would make it worth landlords' while to register.

Peer Jurisdictions/
State Law
Concord, Newark ($25)
Recommendation (a) Set an annual per-unit registration fee by Council resolution, sized to recover the costs of administering the registry and the ordinance. (b) Make proof of current registration a requirement for serving a valid notice of termination and make failure to register an affirmative defense to eviction. (c) Allow the City to impose administrative penalties for failure to register.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONNECTION
Update of the Tenant Protection Policies is included in the Fiscal Year 2026-2028 Strategic Plan as item No. 6 under the “Livable, Safe and Vibrant Community” MultiYear Goal.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this study session, however, several recommendations, if adopted, would require additional staff and program resources, including a City-sponsored relocation program for tenants under a government order to vacate (Government Order Policy-5), expanded review and monitoring of termination notices, and translated tenants’ rights materials. A rent registry would require software, staff time and/or a vendor contract; however, the fee could offset some of those costs.

Staff will estimate these costs and identify potential funding sources, including any cost recovery from landlords, when the draft ordinance is presented for adoption.

STAFF COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC
Information related to Phase 1 and Phase 2 has been presented to and discussed with the Housing Committee eight times between October 2, 2024, and September 2, 2026, and once with the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC), on July 15, 2026.

Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

Both the Housing Committee and Economic Development Advisory Committee provided supportive feedback regarding the proposed policy recommendations.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The City Attorney's Office has advised that Councilmember Priforce has a conflict of interest related to For Cause Policy-1 (Minimum Amount for Non-Payment of Rent), Civil Remedies Policy-1 (Define Minimum Damages), and Civil Remedies Policy-4 (Filing of Termination Notices with the City). To ensure the Council's deliberations are free from any potential conflict, staff will present these three recommendations as a separate item at the end of the study session. Councilmember Priforce will publicly identify the conflict, recuse himself, and leave the room before the Council discusses or gives direction on those items. Councilmember Priforce may participate in the discussion of all other recommendations in this report.

QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
After hearing a presentation and receiving public testimony, staff requests that the City Council provide comments and direction regarding the policy recommendations, and the following questions:

1. Does the City Council want to establish a minimum threshold for non-payment of rent?

2. Does the City Council want to allow owner move-ins to include grandchildren and grandparents?

3. Does the City Council want to consider providing moving costs for tenants with disabilities as an additional benefit for short-term relocation (Tier 1)?

4. Does the City Council want to increase long-term relocation (Tier 3) payment requirements for small landlords?

5. Is the City Council interested in providing additional relocation benefits to vulnerable populations (e.g., tenants with disabilities, households below 80% AMI)?

6. Is the City Council interested in offering emergency relocation assistance to tenants displaced by a government order to vacate?

7. Does the City Council want to require a fee for residential landlords to support administration of the Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance?

8. Does the City Council have any further direction to staff regarding the recommended changes to the Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance.

NEXT STEPS
Following the study session, staff will incorporate the City Council’s direction and work with the City Attorney’s Office to prepare a draft ordinance amending Chapter 40 Tenant Protection Policy Recommendations
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

(Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations) of Title 5 of the Emeryville Municipal Code.

Staff anticipate returning to the City Council with the draft ordinance for first reading before the end of 2026.

PREPARED BY: Valerie F. Bernardo, Economic Development & Housing Manager Attachments
• Attachment A – Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions Report
• Attachment B – Eviction Trends Summary Report
• Attachment C – Stakeholder & Community Outreach Report

CALIFORNIA

MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 6, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager
SUBJECT: Supplemental Staff Report for Item 3.1 – Tenant Protections Policy Recommendations

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council consider the revised statement for the Conflict of Interest section of the staff report and adopt it as an amendment before hearing the item.

The revised Conflict of Interest section would read as follows:

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Since the City Attorney’s Office has advised Council Member Priforce that he has a conflict-of-interest with respect to three of the staff’s recommendations, he has agreed to recuse himself from participating on those items and staff will present them as a separate item to the remainder of the Council at the end of the study session.

A-1

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection
Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing
Conditions
1 Introduction
In response to the increasing housing pressure on renters in California, many jurisdictions have implemented tenant protection ordinances as well as rent stabilization programs.

The State has also implemented its own tenant protection and rent stabilization ordinances. Emeryville passed a just-cause eviction and tenant harassment ordinance in 2017, which was revised in 2020 in response to the COVID 19 pandemic. In response to requests from City Council and the Housing Committee, the City contracted PlaceWorks to conduct an analysis of the existing ordinance and to identify opportunities to update the ordinance to provide additional tenant protections. Policies or strategies that were identified as best practices are those that provide the most protection to tenants.

As part of its analysis of common strategies for enacting tenant protections at a local level, PlaceWorks reviewed and compared the existing tenant protection ordinances for seven cities across California. This set of cities includes a mix of small and medium-sized cities, predominantly in northern California. Though West Hollywood is not in northern California, it was included as a small, high-density jurisdiction within a larger urban metropolitan area, similar to Emeryville. Elements of the tenant protection ordinance were previously reviewed by City staff for four of these jurisdictions (Larkspur, Concord, Oakland, and Berkeley) and were compared in a review prior to this study. The existing comparison was updated and expanded as part of this review. Like Emeryville, all seven cities reviewed use a range of strategies to address tenant protections and have ordinances with varying levels of complexity. This presents an opportunity to consider those strategies that are common, even in jurisdictions that have Tenant Protection Ordinances with a limited scope. The following are the seven cities reviewed:
• Half Moon Bay
• Healdsburg
• West Hollywood
• Larkspur
• Concord
• Oakland
• Berkeley
Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-2
Appendix B, Policy Comparison Table, compares certain provisions of each of these cities and the City of Emeryville in a table format. Because the State has also adopted eviction and tenant protections that have similarities to some local ordinances, and because some cities use these as a reference point for various parts of their ordinances, some elements of State law are discussed.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-3
2 Findings
• While the required means of communication vary, many jurisdictions compared in this analysis require landlords to communicate with tenants in writing about the rights outlined in their respective ordinances at the beginning of tenancy and when notices to end tenancy are issued. Some jurisdictions also require these notices to be posted in common areas, where those common areas exist. • Many local ordinances include similar definitions of what constitutes either “just cause” or “no fault” evictions to those listed in the State’s just-cause eviction ordinance, though many cities have adjusted these provisions to reflect local needs or patterns in evictions.
• Additionally, many jurisdictions have identified ways to protect certain classes of tenants, such as families with children, seniors, and persons with disabilities, from no-fault evictions.
• Like Emeryville, all of the cities surveyed require some form of relocation payment to be made in cases of certain types of no-fault evictions, and it is typical for jurisdictions to increase these payments for protected tenant groups. • Like Emeryville, all of the cities surveyed list some protections for tenants against retaliation or harassment, and several provide expanded definitions that are more specific than the definition modeled by the state.
• In several cases, forming a tenant association or union is explicitly protected behavior in these sections of the ordinance, with varying degrees of specificity in the types of behavior that are protected.
• Most jurisdictions surveyed define legal remedies for violations, which in some cases include minimum penalties for violating the ordinance. • Though not all cities directly provide mediation or counseling, it is common for cities to provide tenants with some connection to legal aid services through information on the City’s website to support tenants navigating issues with their landlord.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-4
3 Summary of Best Practices
Numerous best practices emerged from a review of State law and ordinances in Emeryville and seven other cities. While a comprehensive list is provided here, not every practice fits every community; local conditions should always guide implementation decisions.

Recommendations specific to Emeryville, as well as a red-lined draft showing proposed changes to the City’s ordinance are provided in the main report. • Tenant Notices: Requiring landlords to provide tenants with a notice directing them to information about their rights, particularly if a jurisdiction provides language that must be included in the notice, is a best practice. Providing references to the code sections or specific information about what information tenants and landlords may find in the ordinance and contact information are also best practices. • Non-Payment Minimums: Per State law, non-payment of rent is a permitted reason for at-fault evictions. However, under State law tenants are not protected from pretextual evictions based on nominal amounts of non-payment. Setting minimums for non-payment amounts is a best practice. Required minimum amounts could be equal to or greater than one month of fair market rent as determined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
• Occupancy Restrictions: Defining the circumstances in which occupancy restrictions may be considered just cause for eviction is a best practice because tenants and landlords are better informed about what is not allowed. An exception for children under 18 provides additional protection for growing families and is therefore a best practice. Including a landlord’s right to reasonably approve replacement tenants within the ordinance text and providing some definition of reasonable approval measures is also a best practice.
• Lease Terms: Requiring tenants to accept lease terms in writing is a best practice because it ensures that tenants were aware of a lease term and clarifies tenancy terms for both parties, which could be useful for dispute mediation. • Pets: Prohibiting evictions for certain types of pet ownership provides tenant protection and is a best practice, particularly if it addresses a known need in the community.
• Income-Restricted Units: It is a best practice to specify the eligibility of eviction for over-income residents of deed-restricted affordable units if they have been overincome by more than fifty percent for at least two consecutive years. The deedrestricted unit could subsequently be rented to a qualifying household. • Defenses Against At-Fault Evictions: It is a best practice to provide tenants with a defense against an eviction in certain situations, such as if the eviction is based on an act of domestic violence, elder or dependent adult abuse, sexual assault, human trafficking, or stalking against the tenant or their household member if a Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-5
temporary restraining order, emergency protective order, or protective order issued within 180 days protects the household member against the aforementioned violence or abuse.
• Educators and Students: Prohibiting no-fault evictions during the school year for households with students under a certain age who are currently enrolled in school is a best practice. Other groups could be added to a list of groups defended against no-fault evictions depending on community needs.
• Owner Move-In:
o Having protections against owner-move ins for certain protected groups is a best practice.
o Specifying move-in timing and duration is a best practice. o Defining a specific minimum percentage of ownership that is required to use this cause for eviction is a best practice.
o Adding the landlord’s spouse or registered domestic partner to the list of permitted relatives is a best practice, particularly if the number of evictions in a given time period are limited to prevent excessive tenant displacement. • Removal from the Rental Market: Requiring a one-year notice prior to an Ellis Act eviction for certain situations, such as if a member of the household is 62 years of age or older, disabled, or terminally ill and has lived in the home for at least 12 months is a best practice.
• Renovations: Specifying that cosmetic improvements are not a basis for eviction is a best practice. It is also a best practice to specify that renovations which require the property to be vacated must be limited to those that address health and safety concerns or code violations.
• Just Cause Eviction Exemptions: Tailoring requirements to local conditions is a best practice. Beyond those listed in State law, jurisdictions can specify additional housing types that are exempt from just cause evictions, for example, single-family homes where the landlord rents two or fewer units, duplexes where the landlord lives in one unit, or exemptions for units where family members of the owner reside. • Relocation Payments:
o Earlier payment deadlines for relocation fees (such as within 15 calendar days of the notice being served) is a best practice.
o It is a best practice to require additional payments for protected groups, which could include seniors, disabled residents, terminally ill residents, or low-income residents. Requiring landlords to provide information about the criteria to qualify for additional payments and a means for tenants to selfreport their eligibility is a best practice. • Tenant Harassment or Retaliation and Right to Organize:

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-6
o Specifying behaviors that are interpreted as harassing or retaliatory is a best practice, including typical behaviors and any specific ones that are unique to an individual jurisdiction.
o Explicitly including threats based on immigration status as harassing behavior is a best practice and could be expanded to include requesting information or documentation on immigration or citizenship status except as required by federal law.
o Explicitly including interference with tenant organizing efforts as harassing behavior is a best practice, including specifying what behaviors are covered by this right.
o Requiring the landlord and tenant organizations to “confer with each other in good faith” and defining what that entails is also a best practice. • Penalties and Remedies: Allowing tenants to be awarded damages is a best practice. Additional best practices include defining minimum damages and permitting either the tenant or the City Attorney to initiate a civil action. • Legal Aid or Mediation: Making legal aid services or counseling easily available to tenants is a best practice.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-7
4 Rent Stabilization and Rental Registry or License
All jurisdictions in California are subject to rent stabilization under California Civil Code (CIV) Section 1947.12. Per this section of the Civil Code, rents may not be raised more than 5 percent plus the percentage change in the cost of living based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI), or 10 percent, whichever is lower. Housing that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within the previous 15 years is exempt from this law unless it is a mobilehome, as are deed-restricted affordable units; dormitories; housing subject to other jurisdictions’ rent control; and housing alienable separate from the title to any other dwelling unit, including a mobilehome, provided that the owner is not a real estate investment trust, corporation, LLC in which at least one member is a corporation, or mobile home park management, and where the tenants have been provided written notice of the unit’s exemption. As of October 2025, this statewide rent cap is scheduled to sunset on January 1, 2030.

However, all of the cities reviewed in this study except for Healdsburg and Emeryville have some form of rent stabilization that is more restrictive than the statewide rent cap, which therefore supersedes the State rent cap. These rent stabilization programs are typically included within the same section of the municipal code as other tenant protection measures, as they are applied to similar housing types. Rent stabilization ordinances often exempt new construction, though the definition of new construction varies by city. For most other cities studied, the rent cap has a similar structure to the State’s rent cap, but with a lower annual rate of rent increase. For example, in Oakland, the CPI adjustment is more restrictive than that of the State law (60 percent of the percentage increase in CPI, or 3 percent, whichever is lower), and the City of Oakland requires an additional multi-year cap of 30 percent increase over five years.

Of the six cities surveyed that have rent stabilization in place, all but Larkspur require owners to register rentals with the city. Emeryville does not currently have a rental registry in place. According to a June 2025 article in the Marin Independent Journal, Larkspur previously began the process of instituting a rental registry program but quickly ended the program after push-back from landlords and the California Apartment Association. 1 Per
the article, landlords felt that this rental registry was too burdensome and expressed concerns about privacy and administrative cost to the City.

To address the administrative cost, the rental registries in Half Moon Bay, West Hollywood, Concord, Berkeley, and Oakland charge a rental registration fee:
1 Waite, K. 2025, June 10. “Larkspur to abandon rental registry.” Marin Independent Journal. https://www.marinij.com/2025/06/10/larkspur-to-abandon-rental-registry/.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-8
• In Half Moon Bay, the rental registry program is described as a method of helping the City to track important data on housing to make policy decisions. Annual fees in Half Moon Bay are $75 per unit.
• In West Hollywood, the associated fee is framed as a way to cover the cost of enforcing the tenant protection ordinance. Annual fees in West Hollywood are $144 per unit.
• In Concord, landlords with properties that are fully covered by both rent stabilization and the just cause for eviction ordinance pay $47 per unit, while properties that are only covered by the rental registry requirement or the just cause for eviction ordinance pay only $29 per unit.
• In Berkeley, registration fees are $344 per unit for units covered by both the rent control and just cause ordinance, $212 per unit for units covered by the just cause ordinance that are not rent controlled, and $53 for affordable housing units managed by a nonprofit with a regulatory agreement through the Berkeley Affordable Housing Trust.
• In Oakland, a fee of $137 per unit is charged by the Rent Adjustment Program (RAP), payable to the Business Tax Office.

In addition to monitoring compliance with any rent stabilization programs, the rent registration process can benefit enforcement of any new tenant protections, as these measures can be communicated to landlords or property managers as part of the annual re-registration process. Additionally, as noted in Half Moon Bay, the City can more easily track patterns of rental housing availability, rents, and evictions through a centralized database. Data collected by rental registries includes the following:
• The name, mailing address, phone number, and email address of the owner, landlord, and property manager as applicable (Half Moon Bay, Concord, Berkeley). • The street address (and unit number where applicable) (Half Moon Bay, Oakland, Concord, West Hollywood, Berkeley).
• The date on which the landlord received legal title to or equitable interest in the rental unit (Berkeley).
• Housing services provided for the rental unit (West Hollywood, Berkeley). • The Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) (Half Moon Bay).
• The number of bedrooms and bathrooms in each unit; including square footage (Half Moon Bay, Concord).
• The number of bedrooms in the unit (Berkeley)
• The occupancy status of each Residential Rental Unit (Half Moon Bay, Concord). • The number of individuals currently residing in the unit, if occupied (Half Moon Bay, Oakland, Berkeley).
• Where applicable, the number of rooms individually rented (Half Moon Bay).

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-9
• The start date of the current tenancy (Oakland, Concord, West Hollywood, Berkeley).
• The current amount of the monthly rent charged for each unit (Half Moon Bay, Oakland, Concord, West Hollywood, Berkeley).
• The rent in effect on June 6, 1978; the rent in effect on December 30, 1979; the rent in effect on December 31, 1981; the base rent ceiling; the lowest rent in effect between June 6, 1978 and the date of the adoption of the section of the code (Berkeley)
• Whether the rental unit was vacant or occupied on May 31, 1980 (Berkeley) • Lease duration (West Hollywood)
• Whether the monthly rent includes specified utilities (Half Moon Bay, Oakland). • Utilities metering (Oakland).
• Initial rent of the current tenancy (Oakland, Concord, West Hollywood, Berkeley). • Amount of last rent increase (Oakland).
• Date of most recent rent increase (Concord, Berkeley). • Security deposit provided at the start of tenancy (Oakland). • Whether or not the unit’s monthly rent is subsidized (e.g., such as through a housing voucher or another subsidy) (Half Moon Bay, West Hollywood). • Tenant information:
o Name and e-mail (Oakland).
o Name, e-mail, and phone number (West Hollywood).
• Reason that the previous tenant vacated (Oakland).

All of the cities surveyed require landlords to obtain either a business license or a business tax certificate, though none specifically cite this within their tenant protection legislation.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-10
5 Tenant’s Rights Notices
All of the cities surveyed, including Emeryville, require tenants to be notified of the existence of the City’s tenant protection ordinance at the start of tenancy and with a notice of termination. West Hollywood also requires an annual reminder to be included with rent increase notices or lease renewals, as is the case in Emeryville. Healdsburg is unique in only requiring the notice to be provided in cases of no-fault eviction, and only to notify the tenant of their right to relocation assistance and the existence of the State’s antiretaliation law. The other cities require a notice of tenant’s rights to be provided to all tenants. Depending on the jurisdiction, this is typically provided to the tenant at the time of move-in. West Hollywood also requires that notices be posted in a conspicuous place in buildings with five or more units, and Oakland requires that the notice be posted in at least one common space if buildings have at least one interior common area accessible by all tenants.

Some cities surveyed, such as Emeryville and Concord, provide specific text that must be included in the notice that is provided to all tenants at the time of lease signing. This includes summaries of some of the tenant’s rights along with references to specific municipal code sections that contain more information. Other cities, such as Oakland, provide a specific notice form that must be used. In Oakland, tenants must sign an acknowledgement of having received this notice. Concord specifies the font size for the notice (at least 12-point type) and requires that the notice be provided in both English and Spanish. West Hollywood and Oakland also provide translations of the notice and/or sample text into languages other than English that are common in the area. Specific information regarding outside legal aid service providers is not included in any of the sample or required notice text for the cities surveyed. However, some cities’ notices include contact information for the office or board that manages the rent stabilization program, which can provide counseling or direct residents to resources. For example, Berkeley and Oakland’s notice text includes contact information for the Rent Adjustment Program or Rent Board, respectively, and West Hollywood’s notice requirement requires that the notice provides a contact number for the Department of Rent Stabilization.

Examples of provided notice text or required notice content related to tenant protections include the following:

City of Emeryville
“The City of Emeryville regulates the relationship between most landlords and tenants within the City. Generally, landlords may not terminate your tenancy without cause or explanation, and may not reduce or stop providing services agreed to in the rental contract, so long as you pay rent on time as agreed in the rental contract.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-11
In addition to State and Federal Laws, the Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations chapter of the Emeryville Municipal Code creates certain rights for landlords and tenants, which may include the right to relocation assistance or the right to return to your rental unit if you are evicted. Visit the City of Emeryville website for more information:
http://www.emeryville.org”
City of Oakland
“Oakland has eviction controls (the Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance and Regulations, O.M.C. § 8.22) which limit the grounds for evictions in covered units. It also prohibits nofault evictions (owner move-in or substantial repairs evictions) for owners who are delinquent on their business taxes. For more information contact the RAP office.” “Oakland has a Tenant Protection Ordinance (“TPO”) to deter harassing behaviors by landlords and to give tenants legal recourse in instances where they are subjected to harassing behavior by landlords (O.M.C. 8.22.600).”
City of Concord
“Concord law provides that, a Landlord must provide a statement of cause in any notice to terminate a Tenancy. See Section 19.40.070 of the Concord Municipal Code for more information. In addition, City of Concord Municipal Code Sections 19.40.070(e) and

19.40.080 provide tenants evicted on a no-fault basis with the right to return to the Tenant’s original Covered Rental Unit if such Covered Rental Unit is returned to the market, and the right to relocation assistance and a moving stipend; see City of Concord Municipal Code Sections 19.40.070(e) and 19.40.080 for more information.” City of West Hollywood
“This property is also subject to Chapter 17.52 of the City of West Hollywood Rent Stabilization Ordinance, which includes, but is not limited to, the protections related to eviction and the prohibition against tenant harassment.” Requiring landlords to provide tenants with a notice directing them to information about their rights is a best practice that Emeryville already follows. Emeryville also already provides language that must be included, which can support compliance. Though Emeryville’s required text directs tenants to the City’s website, several other cities provide more specific references to the code sections or specific information about what information tenants and landlords may find in the ordinance and provide more specific contact information. This is a best practice to help tenants and landlords find information about tenant rights.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-12
6 Just-Cause Eviction

6.1 At-Fault Evictions
Permitted reasons for at-fault eviction in CIV Section 1946.2(b)(2) include:
• Non-payment of rent
• A breach of a material term of the lease, including violation of the lease after being issued a written notice about the violation
• Committing or permitting the commission of a nuisance • After receiving a written request or demand from the landlord, the tenant has refused to execute a written an extension or renewal of their lease with similar provisions
• Assigning or subletting the property in violation of the lease • Refusing to allow the landlord reasonable access the property • Using the property to conduct criminal activity or engaging in criminal activity on or off the property that is directed at the owner or any agent of the property • The tenant fails to vacate after being terminated as an employee of the property • The tenant provides written notice of their intention to terminate their tenancy but does not leave the property at the end of the tenancy
These are generally the same as those identified in each of the cities surveyed, including Emeryville, though some cities have further refined the circumstances in which these reasons for eviction may or may not be applied. Healdsburg does not further define at-fault evictions beyond referencing the State law.

In Oakland, evictions for non-payment must be equal to or greater than one month of fair market rent as determined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This is considered a best practice, as it prevents pretextual evictions based on nominal amounts of non-payment. As described in Appendix D: Eviction Trends Summary, of the 1,628 notices that were issued due to failure to pay rent between 2021 and 2025, 268 were for amounts less than $1,000.

6.1.1.1 Criminal Activity
Most cities surveyed use varying language with regard to evictions based on criminal activity, such as using “unlawful” rather than “illegal,” but with generally similar meaning.

Emeryville includes this as a permitted reason for eviction, including unlawful distribution of a controlled substance or unlawful use, manufacture, or possession of weapons and ammunition as possible illegal activities. Berkeley does not specify this as a permitted basis for at-fault eviction. Half Moon Bay specifies that in the case of criminal activity, the activity must be reported to law enforcement, and that the tenant can restore their tenancy rights if acquitted or if charges are not filed within the statute of limitations. West Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-13
Hollywood specifies that use of the home for a home business cannot be the basis of an eviction for illegal activity if the home is in a zone that permits home businesses and the tenant has an administrative permit.

Cities surveyed that define reasons for at-fault evictions also identify either “committing waste” or damaging the unit as being permitted reasons for an at-fault eviction. In Emeryville, this justification for eviction is described as “created or is maintaining a dangerous and unsanitary condition.”

6.1.1.2 Subletting and Occupancy
California Civil Code Section 1946.2 does not set specific occupancy limits with regard to evictions. Emeryville currently limits this reason for eviction to situations where the tenant’s occupancy violation increased the number of persons living in the unit beyond a total of two persons per bedroom plus one, though the ordinance also references the landlord’s right to approve replacement occupants. Defining the circumstances in which occupancy restrictions may be considered just cause for eviction is a best practice because tenants and landlords are better informed about what is not allowed. No exceptions are provided for children under 18 in the current Emeryville ordinance.

Including this exception provides additional protection for growing families and is therefore a best practice.

As noted, Emeryville’s ordinance references the landlord’s right to approve replacement occupants. The ordinance also implies that a tenant could replace a member of the household so long as the total number of tenants does not exceed the maximum defined by the ordinance. Specifying within the ordinance that landlords have the right to reasonably approve replacement tenants and providing some definition of what measures are reasonable to take is considered a best practice to prevent potential conflicts regarding replacement tenants that may escalate to eviction.

State law identifies “assigning or subletting the premises in violation of the tenant’s lease” as a permitted at-fault, just cause for eviction. Though all cities surveyed except for Healdsburg identify subletting without permission as a violation that is considered cause for an at-fault eviction, requirements around subletting or an excess of occupants vary in some cities:
• In Berkeley, a tenant is protected from eviction for subletting if the original tenant remains in the unit and the landlord has unreasonably withheld consent to subtenancy. Unreasonable withholding of consent in Berkeley refers to the tenant requesting the sublease in writing and the potential subtenant meeting the landlord’s typical conditions for residence.
• Oakland tenants are protected from eviction if replacing tenants or the addition of tenants puts the total number of tenants within the total number of tenants Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-14
permitted by the Fire, Building, Housing, and Planning codes. As in Berkeley, Oakland landlords have the right to approve the replacement tenant within reason. • In Larkspur, occupancy limit violations are not permitted reasons for eviction if the additional occupant is under 18 or the new tenant is a replacement for a prior tenant. Landlords in Larkspur also have the right to approve replacement tenants, within reason.
o This is also the case in Half Moon Bay.
• In West Hollywood, adding tenants above the number agreed upon in the lease is considered a violation for which an at-fault eviction is permitted. However, eviction for this cause is not permitted if the additional occupant is the spouse, registered domestic partner, brother, sister, parent, grandparent, or non-dependent child or grandchild (by blood or adoption). It is also not permitted if increase in number of tenants is due to the birth, adoption, or change of custody of a minor child or children. Additionally, in West Hollywood, if the original tenant vacates the unit, the surviving tenant in the unit is not covered by tenant protections unless the person lived in the unit with the tenant for at least one year and the tenant has died or become incapacitated.

6.1.1.3 Lease Violations
Emeryville’s ordinance permits eviction where a tenant “violated a material term of the rental agreement.” In West Hollywood, landlords have an obligation to have provided a written statement of covenants and obligations of the tenant to evict based on a lease violation. In Oakland and Berkeley, the landlord must demonstrate that the violation caused a substantial, actual injury and that the tenant’s conduct was unreasonable. In Oakland, landlords must also prove that the term of tenancy was reasonable, legal, and accepted in writing by the tenant. Requiring tenants to accept lease terms in writing in order to use this reason for eviction was not a common feature in tenant protection ordinances of cities surveyed but is a best practice because it ensures that tenants were aware of a lease term and clarifies tenancy terms for both parties, which could be useful for dispute mediation.

6.1.1.4 Pets
Possession of pets is not identified as a permitted or prohibited reason for eviction in Emeryville’s ordinance. Under specific circumstances, West Hollywood identifies possession of pets as not being a permitted reason for eviction related to an occupancy violation. These are generally related to the pet’s size and species, the date of the start of the tenancy, and whether the tenant is more than 62 years of age, is disabled, or is living with HIV/AIDS. The city also does not permit breed restrictions. Prohibiting evictions for certain types of pet ownership provides tenant protection and could be considered a best practice, particularly if it addresses a known need in the community. However, none of the other cities surveyed had this type of prohibition.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-15

6.1.1.5 Other Causes
Emeryville’s ordinance allows for an eviction of tenants that are temporarily residing in housing during a sabbatical of up to one year or a deployment by any branch of the United States Armed Forces. In West Hollywood, it is permitted to evict tenants that are temporarily residing in housing during the landlord’s sabbatical, extended vacation, or temporary absence if the tenant refuses to leave at the end of the defined term and the tenant has received 60 days’ notice prior to the intent to return. Emeryville also allows for an eviction of tenants if the landlord will convert the covered unit to a condominium.

West Hollywood also identifies eviction of over-income residents of affordable units subject to an inclusionary housing agreement as being eligible for eviction if they have been over-income by more than fifty percent for at least two consecutive years. This cause for eviction is not specified in Emeryville’s ordinance but could be considered a best practice because the deed-restricted unit could subsequently be rented to a qualifying household.

6.1.1.6 Defenses Against At-Fault Evictions
In Half Moon Bay, tenants have a defense against an eviction if the eviction is based on an act of domestic violence, elder or dependent adult abuse, sexual assault, human trafficking, or stalking against the tenant or their household member if a temporary restraining order, emergency protective order, or protective order issued within 180 days protects the household member against the aforementioned violence or abuse. This defense does not apply if the protective order allows the person against whom the protective order has been issued to visit the property or if the landlord believes that the person against whom the protective order has been issued poses a physical threat to other tenants or their guests or otherwise threatens the tenants’ rights to quiet enjoyment of the rental. Other cities surveyed, including Emeryville, did not have any specified defenses against evictions, though this could be considered a best practice if it addresses a known need in the community.

6.2 No-Fault Evictions
The same section of the California Civil Code defines no-fault evictions as falling under the following categories:
• Move-in by the owner or the owner’s spouse, domestic partner, children, grandchildren, parents, or grandparents for a minimum of 12 months. • Withdrawal of the unit from the rental market.
• Compliance with a government order that necessitates vacating the property. • Intent to demolish or substantially remodel the unit.

Though not all cities surveyed specifically identify these reasons using the term “no fault,” each city, including Emeryville treats these reasons for eviction differently than those that Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-16
are otherwise permitted under the just cause eviction ordinance, including requiring relocation payments or providing additional defenses for certain tenants.

In Half Moon Bay, if a household includes a student aged 21 or younger who is registered and actively attending any level of school, that household cannot be evicted for a no-fault reason during the school term. Similarly, in Concord, a household that includes a schoolaged child has a defense against any no-fault eviction during the school year. In Oakland, households with either educators or children under age 18 who are enrolled in school have a defense against owner move-in evictions or evictions to complete substantial repairs during the Oakland Unified School District school year. Prohibiting no-fault evictions for households with educators and/or students under a certain age who are currently enrolled in school could be considered a best practice for preventing displacement and the destabilization of families.

6.2.1.1 Owner Move-In
All cities surveyed permit owners to evict tenants if they or a permitted relative intend to live in the unit. Emeryville limits owner move-ins to the landlord’s parents and children. As is the case in the State’s just-cause eviction ordinance, permitted relatives in all cities surveyed except Berkeley and Emeryville include the landlord’s spouse, children, grandchildren, parents, or grandparents. In Berkeley, this is limited to the landlord’s spouse, parent, or child. All cities except Berkeley and West Hollywood include the landlord’s domestic partner in this list. Adding the landlord’s spouse to the list of permitted relatives is a best practice, and including domestic partners in this list could be more inclusive of diverse family types. Providing this distinction could be helpful in situations where a landlord’s spouse or registered domestic partner does not live in the same house and would ensure that these family members could also access this move-in option even if they aren’t on the title to the home. Preventing tenant displacement in these situations could be addressed by including limitations. For example, this type of move-in could be limited to situations where the landlord maintains a different home as their primary residence either within the City of Emeryville or within a certain distance of the city and/or limiting the number of evictions in a given time period.

Though not included in all of the cities surveyed, defining a specific minimum percentage of ownership that is required to use this cause for eviction is a best practice, as it can prevent buildings with many owners from each attempting to evict a tenant for a family move-in:
• Emeryville’s regulations require that a landlord have at least a 50 percent ownership stake in a unit to file an eviction so that the owner or a close relative can move in [reg-5-40-.03(e)(2)(b)],
Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-17
• West Hollywood notes that a landlord must have at least 50 percent ownership stake in the building or be a beneficiary with at least 50 percent ownership in a trust to conduct this type of eviction.
o In a circumstance where two owners each have a 50 percent ownership in a rental building, each may use the owner move-in process with one tenant.

However, owner move-ins in West Hollywood are limited to one eviction every six years, even where building ownership changes. o Owner move-ins are not considered a just cause for eviction in West Hollywood if a comparable unit in the building is vacant. • Similarly, Berkeley requires at least a 50 percent ownership stake in order to conduct an owner move-in eviction.
• This threshold is lower in Concord, where an individual owner must only have a 25 percent stake, or have ownership shared entirely among family members, or have ownership recorded through a limited liability company or partnership.

Requiring the owner initiating the landlord or relative move-in to have at least a 50 percent ownership stake is considered a best practice. It is recommended that this be expressed within the ordinance text rather than a separate regulation in order to ensure landlords are aware of the requirement. Limits on the frequency of owner move-in evictions within a given property can also prevent potential abuse of this eviction type.

Emeryville specifies a two-year period and defines that the landlord or qualified relative must live in the unit for at least 10 months of each of those two years. Emeryville defines the move-in timing loosely, using the word “imminently.” With the exception of Healdsburg, all cities surveyed define a set period of time for which the owner or relative must live in the unit. This varies between 12 and 36 months. Concord, Oakland, and Berkeley all require the move-in to occur within three months (or 90 days), while the rest do not specify specific move-in timing. In Berkeley, owner move-in timing is monitored by twice annual reporting to the Rent Board, and in Concord it is monitored through the rental registry process. Specifying move-in timing and duration is a best practice, as it encourages clarity for both the landlord and tenant. Emeryville, West Hollywood, Larkspur, Concord, Oakland, and Berkeley all identify a tenant’s right to return to the unit if the owner does not move in for the specified period of time. In Concord, there is an exception to the required 24 months of residence in the unit if the owner or their relative needs to vacate the unit due to suffering a serious disability or hardship or becoming terminally ill.

Several cities identify protected groups or situations that have a specific defense against owner move-in evictions:
• Emeryville does not presently defend any groups from owner move-in evictions. • In West Hollywood, for example, terminally ill tenants may not be evicted for an owner move-in.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-18
• Concord extends this defense to seniors, disabled, or persons with a terminal illness if the tenant has lived in the home for at least three years. o However, if the landlord or their family member will move into the unit is also a member of one of those protected groups and no other rental units are available on the property, the owner move-in may still occur. o The tenant may request proof that the intended occupant is the landlord or the landlord’s family member.
o The tenancy may also not be terminated if the intended occupant already occupies a dwelling unit on the property.
• In Oakland, households that have lived in the home for at least five years and have a household member who is either aged 60 or older, disabled, or catastrophically ill have a defense against owner move-in evictions.
o Tenants have a burden of proof to demonstrate protected status. o This defense is not applicable if the landlord or their relative who will move in also fits these criteria.
o The landlord must disclose all property owned by the future occupant and list the address of any property where the future occupant claims a homeowner’s property tax exemption.
• In Berkeley, if the landlord owns another unit in Berkeley that is vacant before the landlord takes possession, the unit must be offered to the evicted tenant. o Owners must report occupancy status to the Rent Board twice annually during the initial 36 months of occupancy to confirm compliance with the required residence period.
o Households with school-aged children have a defense against owner movein evictions during the school year if they have lived in the unit for at least 12 months.
o If the owner owns five or more units in Berkeley and the tenant has lived in the home for at least five years and wishes to remain, the tenant has a defense against an owner move-in.
o For residents 60 years of age or older or disabled residents, they are eligible for this defense for landlords who own four or more units in Berkeley. o These defenses are not applicable if the landlord or qualified family member that will live in the unit are 60 years of age or older or are disabled.

Having protections for certain groups is considered a best practice and groups that are protected within these defenses can be tailored to the specific conditions of the community.

6.2.1.2 Removing the Unit from the Market
Removal of the unit from the rental market is considered a just cause for eviction in all cities surveyed, though some jurisdictions have specific requirements for permitting this Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-19
cause for eviction. Emeryville allows the unit to be removed from the rental market either for demolition or for any other reason. Though all California jurisdictions are subject to the Ellis Act, which allows units to be removed from the rental market, local rules may impose additional restrictions on this type of eviction. In Berkeley, removal of the unit from the rental market is only considered a just cause for eviction if the unit will be demolished. In both West Hollywood and Larkspur if a member of the household that is 62 years of age or older, disabled, or terminally ill and has lived in the home for at least 12 months, the tenant is entitled to at least a one-year notice prior to an Ellis Act eviction. Emeryville’s current ordinance is in line with best practices on removal of units from the rental market.

However, providing additional protections could be considered a best practice. For example, by requiring a one-year notice prior to an Ellis Act eviction for certain situations, such as if a member of the household is 62 years of age or older, disabled, or terminally ill and has lived in the home for at least 12 months.

6.2.1.3 Substantial Renovations or Uninhabitable Units
Substantial renovations are a valid reason for no-fault evictions in Emeryville and many of the cities surveyed. In Emeryville, the definition of substantial renovation does not require that the unit be renovated to address code violations. This is in line with definitions of permitted substantial renovations found in many of the cities surveyed. However, Emeryville’s ordinance does not specify that cosmetic improvements that could be completed safely without having the tenant vacate the property are not considered a just cause for eviction.

In CIV Section 1946.2(b)(2)(D)(ii), substantial remodels are limited to certain types of hazardous material abatement actions or replacement or substantial modification of structural, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical systems where a permit from a governmental agency is required. These remodels must be such that they cannot be completed safely while the tenant is living in the home, and that requires the tenant to vacate the home for at least 30 consecutive days. This reason for eviction also includes intent to demolish the unit. Landlords are not required by state law to evict tenants in order to complete substantial remodels, but may not issue an eviction notice for cosmetic improvements, such as painting, decorating, and minor repairs, or other work that can be performed safely without having the residential real property vacated, nor for remodels that can be completed in less than 30 days. Most cities surveyed have a definition that’s substantially similar to the State’s definition of substantial renovations. Most cities surveyed also note that cosmetic improvements or other work that can be completed safely without having the property vacated are not considered a just cause for eviction.

Larkspur, Healdsburg, and Half Moon Bay provide examples of cosmetic improvements, including painting, decorating, and minor repairs.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-20
In West Hollywood, Oakland, and Berkeley, repairs must be related to code violations or other government order, such as an order stating that the unit is uninhabitable, or must bring the unit into compliance with applicable codes and laws related to health and safety.

Larkspur, Concord, Healdsburg, and Half Moon Bay include compliance with government orders that the unit must be vacated or government orders stating that the unit is considered uninhabitable among the list of just causes for eviction, but do not include these within substantial renovations. Larkspur, Concord, Healdsburg, and Half Moon Bay do not indicate that capital improvements that aren’t intended to comply with a code violation are prohibited. Larkspur and Healdsburg include intent to demolish the unit alongside “substantial renovations.”
Specifying that cosmetic improvements that could be made safely without having the tenant vacate are not a basis for eviction is considered a best practice to prevent potential confusion or over-use of this permitted eviction type. It is also a best practice to specify that renovations which require the property to be vacated must be limited to those that address health and safety concerns or code violations because it can protect tenants, though this is less common.

In response to a City outreach survey, tenants recommended a proactive housing inspection model in order to better identify needed repairs and made recommendations on additional assistance programs that could support tenants when repairs are needed (see Appendix C). These tenant supports could include allowing tenants to put rent in escrow until repairs are made or providing emergency housing or relocation assistance.

6.2.2 Unit Types Not Subject to Just Cause Eviction Ordinance The State’s just cause eviction ordinance, CIV Section 1946.2, does not apply to any of the following housing types:
• Hotels
• Housing in a nonprofit hospital, religious facility, extended-care facility, licensed residential care facility for the elderly, or an adult residential facility • Dormitories
• Housing where the tenant shares bathroom or kitchen facilities with the owner who counts the home as their principal residence
• Single-family, owner-occupied residences, including but not limited to, an accessory unit, junior accessory dwelling unit, or mobile home. • A property with two separate dwelling units within a single structure in which one unit is the owner’s principal place of residence and neither is an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU)
• Housing that has been issued a certificate of occupancy within the previous 15 years, unless it is a mobile home
Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-21
• Residential real property that is alienable separate from the title to any other dwelling unit (e.g., single-family homes, condominiums), so long as the owner is not a real estate investment trust (REIT), corporation, LLC in which one or more members is a corporation, or mobile home park management.

These units are also typically exempt from local just-cause eviction ordinances in cities surveyed, with some exceptions. These exemptions typically include exempting additional unit types, or slightly varying the unit type that is exempt from the local ordinance compared to units exempt from the State ordinance:
o In Emeryville, dormitories are not exempt but are also not a relevant housing type in the city. Emeryville also exempts nonprofit, cooperatively owned units, which is not typical in most of the cities surveyed but reflects local conditions. Emeryville’s exemption for rooms rented within a single-family home does not specify that the tenants must share a kitchen or bathroom with the landlord. Emeryville also does not extend the exemption to duplex units.
o West Hollywood does not include buildings with two units, one of which is owneroccupied, in its local ordinance. West Hollywood also exempts properties owned by a nonprofit organization, and rental units occupied by the landlord or one of their family members (i.e., spouse, parent, grandparent, brother, sister, or child) as their principal residence.
o Half Moon Bay does not include single-family homes or condominiums where the owner is not a corporation, LLC, mobile home park management, or REIT within its list of exemptions.
o Though Healdsburg’s exemptions are explicitly linked to those defined in State law, unlike State law, Healdsburg’s exemptions for single-family homes that are owneroccupied are inclusive of units with ADUs and JADUs. Healdsburg also exempts deed-restricted affordable units. Like Healdsburg, Larkspur exempts ADUs and JADUs. Dormitories in Larkspur are also exempt.
o In Concord, single-family homes are exempt from the ordinance as long as the landlord rents two or fewer such units. The City Manager is authorized to interpret whether the landlord of two units is “the same or substantially similar.” These homes are still required to participate in the rental registry program. Concord also exempts ADUs, homeless or emergency shelters, and government-owned units. o Like Concord, Oakland exempts homeless or emergency shelters. Oakland’s exemption for newer units is more restrictive, exempting units that have received their certificate of occupancy within the past 10 years rather than 15. Oakland also exempts emergency shelters, as well as short-term alcohol, drug, or substance recovery facilities that are run by nonprofits. Oakland does not specify owneroccupied single-family or two-unit buildings as exempt. Units in Oakland that are held in trust on behalf of a developmentally disabled individual who permanently Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-22
occupies the unit are exempt, as are units that are permanently occupied by a developmentally disabled parent, sibling, child, or grandparent of the owner of that unit.
o Berkeley exempts single-family homes in a “sabbatical exemption” if the property owner only owns one unit in the city, has lived in the unit for at least 365 consecutive days prior to renting the unit, and is renting the unit for 24 months or less. Berkeley’s student housing exemption specifies fraternity and sorority buildings rather than dormitories. Nonprofit cooperatives and ADUs are also exempt.

Best practices with regard to exempt units are defined by local conditions. Exemptions in cities other than Emeryville that may be relevant to Emeryville’s housing conditions include single-family homes where the landlord rents two or fewer units, duplexes where the landlord lives in one unit, or exemptions for units where family members of the owner reside.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-23
7 Relocation Payments
All of the cities surveyed, including Emeryville, require relocation payments for tenants for some types of evictions. Emeryville varies the amount of relocation assistance by the number of units the landlord owns, which is not typical in the cities surveyed. This practice shows an awareness of the potential difference in cashflow between smaller landlords and larger property management companies. In a 2024 report on ownership and management of small multifamily rental properties conducted by the Terner Center at the University of California, Berkeley, approximately one-third of small multi-family properties were owned by retirees, and over one-third were employed in some field other than rental investment2.

Only one-quarter of properties reflected in the study were owned by corporate entities or full-time investors or managers. Many owners reported relying on their rental property as some or all of their income, so Emeryville’s policy reflects sensitivity to the larger impact of a relocation payment on a small landlord compared to a larger property management company. The study was not limited to California, but California landlords were overrepresented in responses, and so responses may have some relationship to trends in ownership among smaller Emeryville landlords.

CIV Section 1946.2(d)(3)(A) requires that relocation fees for no-fault evictions be made within 15 calendar days of service of the eviction notice. The relocation amount must be equal to one month of the tenant’s rent at the time of the eviction. o Healdsburg’s relocation payment amount is the same as State law for most tenants, but additional payments are required for low- or moderate-income tenants.
o For tenants with moderate incomes (at or below 120 percent of the area median income), payment equal to an additional month of rent is required, and an additional payment of the same amount is required if the tenant has an income at or below 80 percent of the area median income. o Tenants have seven calendar days from the notice to terminate to provide proof of their income to the landlord. Healdsburg also permits tenants to elect to waive the last month’s rent rather than receive the relocation payment.
o West Hollywood’s required relocation payments also vary for tenants of low or moderate income. All of West Hollywood’s payment amounts are set annually by the City on a published schedule. As of the 2025-2026 publication, the relocation 2 Manji, S. et al. (January 2024) “The Ownership and Management of Small Multifamily Rental Properties: New Insights on an Overlooked Part of the Rental Market” Terner Center for Housing Innovation. https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Ownership-and-Management-of-SmallMultifamily-Rental-Properties-January-2024-Final.pdf Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-24
payment amount for moderate-income households was $25,131 and the payment amount for lower-income households was $31,645.
o The definition of the household for purposes of determining the payment amount and the household’s income level depends on whether the people living in the unit intend to continue living together following displacement. o West Hollywood also makes relocation payments required for tenants who moved out due to a significant rent increase if the landlord or an applicable family member moves in for at least 30 days within the six months following the termination of tenancy. For this provision to apply, the new rental rate that was noticed by the landlord must exceed the prevailing market rate for similar rental units in the area and must be so great that no reasonable tenant would pay the new rate, absent extraordinary circumstances. This provision is unique within the cities surveyed. West Hollywood has a rent stabilization policy in place, but not all units in the city are subject to the rent stabilization policy. This policy would then apply to units not covered by other rent stabilization laws, and is likely trying to prevent the use of rent increases to coerce renters to leave for purposes of allowing the landlord or their family member to move in without providing the required relocation payments.
o As in West Hollywood, Berkeley’s relocation assistance also varies for low-income residents, as well as disabled or elderly tenants, minor children, or tenants whose tenancies began prior to January 1, 1999. Berkeley’s relocation assistance amount for owner move-ins and the removal of units from the rental market is a fixed amount that increases each year, plus an additional amount for the protected tenants previously described.
o If the eviction is due to substantial repairs, relocation fees for periods of 30 days or less are calculated based on the number of persons in the household and number of days that the tenants may not access their home.

For periods of more than 30 days, storage and moving costs, a $400 dislocation cost, and rent differentials are owed based on the amount of time that the household is out of the unit.
o Oakland’s relocation payments are also based on a fixed amount set by the city based on unit size rather than a multiplier of the tenant’s rent or the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) fair-market rent (FMR).

Between July 1, 2025, and June 30, 2026, these amounts are as follows:
 Studio/1 Bed: $8,106.68
 2 Beds: $9,977.45
 3 Beds: $12,315.92
Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-25
o An additional payment of $2,500 is owed to the household if the tenant households are low-income or include minor children, senior citizens, or residents with disabilities.
o Relocation payments are reduced if the household has lived in the home for fewer than two years. Renters who have only lived in their home for one year at the time of relocation are eligible to receive one-third of the total payment, and residents that have lived in the home for between one and two years are eligible to receive two-thirds of the total payment.
o Though Oakland does not reduce the relocation amount for small landlords, the City does make zero-interest loans available to landlords that own fewer than five units in the city if they are not eligible for a cash-out refinance loan per Fannie Mae regulations.
o Of the cities surveyed, only Concord varied the amount of relocation payments based on the number and type of units owned by the landlord. Concord’s relocation payment varies for single-family or condominium units where three or more units are owned by substantially the same landlord. It is worth noting that single-family homes in Concord are exempt from the tenant protection ordinance if two or fewer are offered for rent by the same or substantially similar landlord, so this difference in payment is more directly related to the unit type rather than the number. For nonprotected tenants, the relocation amount is three times the HUD FMR for a unit of the same size, plus a $3,000 moving stipend. The amount of the required payment for single-family or condo rentals where a landlord has three or more units is only twice the FMR, plus a $2,000 moving stipend.
o Protected tenants, including seniors, low-income renters, residents with disabilities, residents with terminal illnesses, and residents with schoolaged children, are owed an additional payment of one month of FMR. The eviction notice must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the tenant may indicate, under penalty of perjury, whether they or another tenant in the unit have protected status and, if so, under which category.

Like Concord, other cities base repayment amounts on either the tenant’s rent or HUD’s FMR for the area, based on the unit size:
o Larkspur’s repayment is the greater of $5,000 or three months of rent. Protected residents, which includes residents 62 years of age or older, disabled, or terminally ill residents, get an additional payment of $3,000.
o Half Moon Bay also sets the relocation payment at three months of rent or allows tenants to request that the final three months of rent be waived as an alternative to payment of relocation expenses.

Cities surveyed generally require some or all of the relocation payment to be paid within 15 calendar days of the notice being served, though Berkeley requires this payment to occur Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-26
within 10 days of the notice being served. Oakland’s payments are divided into two equal payments, one due at the time the notice is served and the other paid when the tenant moves out. As discussed in Appendix C, earlier payment deadlines for relocation fees can provide a potential defense against evictions, and so are a best practice.

Requiring additional payments for protected groups within the community is considered a best practice, as it reflects the economic challenges that those groups may face in securing new housing at a rent they can afford. Groups that are entitled to additional payments should reflect housing challenges in the city, but could include seniors, disabled residents, terminally ill residents, or low-income residents. Concord’s requirement to include a means for tenants to self-report their eligibility reflects best practice, as it ensures tenants will understand the criteria to qualify for payments.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-27
8 Tenant Harassment or Retaliation
All cities surveyed, including Emeryville have anti-retaliation or anti-harassment provisions in their ordinances, though in Healdsburg, the local ordinance is linked to CIV Section 1942.5 and does not state additional requirements. In Larkspur, landlords are prohibited from taking “any action increasing any rental amount, reducing any service, causing the tenant to involuntarily quit the premises, or discriminating against the tenant because of the tenant’s use of any remedy provided by [the Ordinance].” Berkeley’s definition is relatively similar and notes that tenants can assert retaliation either as a defense against eviction or as an affirmative action. In Berkeley, if the tenant took an action to assert their rights as a tenant within the six months prior to the alleged act of retaliation, the landlord’s action is presumed to be retaliatory.

In a 2025 whitepaper on tenant anti-harassment protections, 3 the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) developed a list of typical harassing behaviors that includes the following:
• Withholding or threatening to withhold repairs or maintenance • Efforts to prevent tenant organizing
• Refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of rent payment • Requesting information or documentation on immigration or citizenship status, unless otherwise required by federal law
• Interfering with the tenant’s right to quiet use and enjoyment of the rental unit, and/ or verbally assaulting and harassing tenant;
• Removing tenant’s personal property from the rental unit • Improperly accessing the unit
• Influencing a tenant to vacate through fraud, intimidation or coercion • Threatening the tenant with physical harm
Though language varies by jurisdiction, most of these behaviors are reflected by the definitions of harassing or retaliatory behavior in Half Moon Bay, West Hollywood, Concord, and Oakland. However, removal of a tenant’s personal property from the rental unit is only called out in Oakland’s definition. Each of these cities also includes some additional specific behaviors that are not included in ABAG’s list, which may reflect specific input from legal-aid providers or tenant advocacy organizations. A sample of these harassing or retaliatory behaviors follows.

Half Moon Bay
3 Association of Bay Area Governments. “Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections”. (April 7, 2025). https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-04/Tenant-Anti-Harassment-Protections-Profile-04- 03-2025.pdf
Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-28
• Releasing information protected by the tenant’s right to privacy except as required or authorized by law
• Requesting or demanding an unreasonable amount of information from tenant in response to a request for reasonable accommodation
West Hollywood
• Soliciting a tenant for sexual conduct in exchange for performing maintenance or in exchange for protection from eviction
• Retaliating against or threatening a tenant for inquiring with, or seeking assistance from, a government or social services agency
Concord
• Failing to maintain a current address for delivery of rent payments • Entering or demanding to enter at times outside normal business hours except as requested by the tenant or otherwise permitted by State law • Communicating with a tenant in a language other than English or the tenant’s primary language for the purpose of intimidating, confusing, deceiving, annoying, seriously alarming, or harassing the tenant
• Communicating with the tenant via text message after the tenant has informed the landlord in writing (but not by text) that the tenant objects to communicating via text Oakland
• Interfering with a tenant's right to privacy, including, but not limited to, video or audio recording of the interior of a tenant's unit, entering or photographing portions of the unit beyond the scope of a lawful entry or inspection, unreasonable inquiry into a tenant's relationship status or criminal history, and unreasonable restrictions on or inquiry into overnight guests
• Committing elder financial abuse, as defined by California Welfare and Institutions Code Section 15610.30 et seq.

In Emeryville, many of the behaviors recommended by ABAG are already meaningfully included in the list of harassing behaviors. Explicitly including interference with tenant organizing efforts is a best practice that is not reflected in the existing Emeryville ordinance. The existing Emeryville ordinance includes “threats based on immigration status,” but this could be expanded to requesting information or documentation on immigration or citizenship status except as required by federal law to cover potential intimidation or the suggestion of immigration-related retaliation. Other harassing behaviors could be added to the existing list to reflect community needs.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-29

8.1 Tenant Right to Organize
Tenants’ rights to organize or form an association are also included within several cities’ anti-harassment or anti-retaliation ordinances. Emeryville does not explicitly define a tenant’s right to organize in its ordinance. In Half Moon Bay, West Hollywood, Berkeley, and Concord, organizing or joining a tenant association or union is explicitly protected behavior.
o Half Moon Bay considers it harassing behavior for a landlord to:
o Interfere with the right of tenants to organize or engage in concerted mutual aid and protection activities;
o To convene tenant meetings in an appropriate space;
o To distribute or post tenants’ rights literature in common areas or bulletin boards;
o Or to provide property access to tenant organizers, advocates, or representatives working with or on behalf of the tenants. o West Hollywood’s definition of harassing behavior related to organizing is less specific, and prohibits retaliation, threats, or interference related to tenant organizing activities, including forming or participating in a tenant association or union.
o This prohibition also includes retaliation or threats for participating in other political activities not related to tenants’ rights.
o Of the cities surveyed, Berkeley has the most robust set of right to organize provisions. The ordinance lists decreasing “any services, including a tenant’s right to engage in Organizing Activities” as a form of retaliation. o Berkeley’s ordinance includes a separate section on the tenants’ right to organize; however, the right to form a tenant association is limited to parcels containing ten or more rental units or parcels with fewer units, so long as the units are managed by a property management company.
 This section requires landlords and tenant associations to “confer with each other in good faith.” The ordinance defines conferring in good faith, including engaging in regular communication, allowing participation by non-resident advocates, providing time for limitedEnglish speakers to organize translation services, and responding to reasonable requests for information.
 “Organizing Activities” as defined by the ordinance include, but are not limited to, contacting tenants, joining or supporting a Tenant Association, distributing literature or offering assistance, or convening meetings. The ordinance also requires the landlord to attend, at the request of the Tenant Association, at least one Tenant Association meeting per calendar year.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-30
Explicitly defining a tenant’s right to organize is a best practice, including specifying what behaviors are covered by this right. Typical rights would include conferring with other tenants and convening meetings, distributing or posting information, and working with outside organizers or advocates. Additionally, though it is less common in the jurisdictions specified, requiring the landlord and tenant organizations to “confer with each other in good faith” is also a best practice, including defining what that entails.

In Concord’s ordinance, tenants have the right to organize and engage with other tenants, including convening tenant meetings and contacting other tenants to offer information or literature on their rights, including posting literature on bulletin boards or other spaces designated for tenant use or free speech. However, it is noteworthy that Concord does not require landlords to permit tenant organizers, advocates, or other representatives working with tenants to access the property, except where required by CIV Section 1942.6 (“upon the invitation of an occupant, during reasonable hours or because of emergency circumstances, for the purpose of providing information regarding tenants’ rights or to participate in a lessees’ association or association of tenants or an association that advocates tenants’ rights”). The City cites Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid as the basis for this. In this case, the Supreme Court considered California legislation requiring agricultural employers to grant access to the employers’ property a per se physical taking. 4 4
"Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid." Oyez. 2025, Accessed October 28 (accessed). https://www.oyez.org/cases/2020/20-107.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-31
9 Penalties and Remedies
Emeryville’s ordinance currently allows tenants to be awarded damages, which is a best practice. Emeryville does not define minimum damages, though this is a common and recommended practice in cities surveyed and may be useful to help offset tenants’ legal costs or other costs associated with fighting unlawful eviction. The ordinance does provide tenants with a right to costs and reasonable attorney fees if the landlord is found to be in violation of the ordinance, and the same right is afforded to landlords that successfully demonstrate compliance during a civil action:
o Of the cities surveyed, only Half Moon Bay does not establish penalties for landlords that have violated the tenant protection ordinance or avenues for legal remedy for tenants who believe their landlord has violated the ordinance. Each of these cities permits either the tenant or the City Attorney to initiate a civil action, which is a best practice.
o Though damages may be awarded to Larkspur tenants for any violation of their ordinance, minimum damages are limited to willful violations of the relocation payment obligations. These are set to three times the damages incurred by the tenant.
o West Hollywood defines damages of $10,000 or actual damages, whichever is greater, plus an additional $5,000 per offense if the aggrieved tenant is a senior citizen or a disabled tenant.
o Similarly, in Concord, the minimum civil penalty is $2,000 per violation with a maximum penalty or $5,000 per violation, with up to an additional $5,000 per violation, at the discretion of the court, if the tenant is disabled or a senior. o In Oakland, a court may award penalties of up to $1,000 per day, plus minimum damages of at least $1,000 or three times the actual damages suffered by the tenant, whichever is greater, with damages of at least $2,000 or three times the actual damages, whichever is greater, for tenants who are elderly or disabled, or where the violation is related to threatening to report a tenant based on their perceived or actual immigration status. Minimum damages for catastrophically ill tenants are $2,500 or three times the actual damages, whichever is greater. o In Berkeley, minimum damages for violations related to the eviction process are $750.
o In Healdsburg, fines are not more than $1,000, plus damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees.

Appendix A: Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions A-32
10 Legal Aid or Mediation
In addition to allowing tenants to seek legal remedies or permitting the City Attorney to bring a civil action, some cities surveyed make legal aid services or counseling available to tenants. Though there are several strategies for providing this assistance, making legal aid or counseling services easily accessible is a best practice.

Emeryville, Berkeley, Healdsburg, Concord, and Larkspur also provide information on their website about legal aid or advocacy organizations that operate in the area. Half Moon Bay provides voluntary mediation services upon request. Translation services are provided for mediation processes. These mediations result in “mediations agreements” between the parties. Berkeley also provides mediation services through the Rent Board, which results in a mediation agreement.

West Hollywood provides free mediation services as well. Here, landlords are required to pay a fee to the City for no-fault evictions, which is higher if the tenant is a senior, disabled, or lives with one or more minor children. This fee is described as covering the cost of providing tenant protection information and counseling to rental tenants. Oakland’s required tenants’ rights notice includes text notifying tenants that advice is available from the Rent Adjustment Program as well as contact information for the program.

AppendixB: Eviction Trends Summary
Introduction
Between January 2022 and July 2025 (“analysis period”), 2,108 notices of eviction were received by the City of Emeryville. The following is an analysis of trends within these notices. An eviction notice is a formal written demand served by a landlord that notifies a tenant of a lease violation or termination and provides a specific window to comply or vacate. An unlawful detainer is a type of civil lawsuit filed by a landlord to regain possession of a property from a tenant who remains after an eviction notice has expired. It is worth noting that the issuance of an eviction notice is not necessarily indicative of the filing of an unlawful detainer with Alameda County, which completes the eviction process. Data on the causes for eviction notices of evictions in Emeryville is available. However, while counts of unlawful detainers are published on the Alameda County Housing and Community Development website, details related to the reason for eviction are not. Unlawful detainer data is discussed herein where available. As noted in a July 2025 study of evictions in the Bay Area commissioned by the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA), eviction data does not reflect any “informal evictions,” such as those where tenants are driven out of their housing without going through a formal eviction process. This can be caused by abusive or harassing behavior by landlords or refusal to conduct essential maintenance.
1 Findings
After California’s COVID-19-related eviction moratorium ended in June 2022, Emeryville typically received fewer than 20 eviction notices per month until June 2023 when more than 80 were received. Subsequently, rates of eviction notices continued to rise. In the 18-month period between February 2024 and July 2025 there were ten months in which the City received at least 100 eviction notices per month, and there were no months in which the City received no notices. This period represents a sharp increase in the number of eviction notices compared to the period prior to February 2024. Between January 2022 and July 2025 there were 2,108 total eviction notices. The properties that issued the largest total number of evictions notices, as well as the highest number of eviction notices per unit were Artistry Emeryville apartments, The Courtyards at 65th Street, and Parc on Powell. In the period of increased eviction notices between February 2024 and July 2025, the reason for 95.9 percent of eviction notices were unpaid rent and/or utilities.

Though some eviction notices for non-payment of rent or utilities were based on large debts, some were issued for amounts less than $200. Many eviction notices received by the City had errors, the most common of which was not attaching a copy of the rental agreement to the notice.

Trends in Eviction Notices, January 2022-July 2025
Eviction Notices by Year and Month
The City of Emeryville received a total of 2,108 eviction notices during the analysis period. Of those, calendar year 2024 had the largest annual share of eviction notices (901, or 42.7 percent of notices in the 1 Bay Area Housing Finance Authority. 2025, July. “Evictions in the Nine-County Bay Area.” https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-07/BAHFA_Evictions-Nine-County-Report-07-27-25.pdf. analysis period), and 635 were issued in the first seven months of 2025. In 2023, 506 notices were issued (24.0 percent of notices in the analysis period) and only 36 were issued in 2022. Fewer eviction notices in 2022 can be largely attributed to the eviction moratorium that was put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic. For each month where eviction notices were issued, an average of 65 notices of eviction were issued. In several months during this period, no eviction notices were issued.

As shown in Figure D-1, the highest monthly counts of notices were issued in February 2025 (120 notices), June 2024 (117 notices), November 2024 (109 notices), and April 2025 (107 notices). Of the notices issued, 30 did not list a date and so were not included in this average. According to Alameda County, an average of 13 unlawful detainers each month were filed for Emeryville tenants during the analysis period. This suggests that for many eviction processes, some tenants may have developed a payment plan or settlement with their landlord, may have worked with an attorney to have the eviction process stopped, or may have elected to leave the apartment voluntarily after receiving the notice to avoid an unlawful detainer being filed. Though there was an increase in unlawful detainer filings for Emeryville residents starting in May 2023, compared to 2022 and the first four months of 2023, there was not an increase in unlawful detainer filings in 2024 and 2025.

Figure D-1: Count of Eviction Notices and Unlawful Detainers in Emeryville by Month and Year, 2022-2025 Source: City of Emeryville, 2025; Alameda County Housing and Community Development, accessed March 2026.

Eviction Notices by Property
The total number of eviction notices issued in Emeryville during the analysis period was 2,108. Of those, 1,855 (88.0 percent) came from six properties. The remaining 12 percent (253 eviction notices) came from 59 properties. Each of the 59 properties had less than 2.0 percent of the total eviction notices citywide. In this analysis, rentals of condominiums within the Watergate community were listed separately by building address. However, none of the Watergate buildings had more than two eviction notices issued during the analysis period. Nearly all of the eviction notices issued during this period were issued by large landlords (97.7 percent of notices issued), which is to say landlords with four or more units, and 1.9 percent of notices were issued by small landlords. The remaining 0.4 percent of eviction notices could not be categorized because the notice did not contain this information and it could not be determined by reviewing other 0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
January 2022
February 2022
March 2022
May 2022
June 2022
July 2022
August 2022
September 2022
October 2022
November 2022
December 2022
January 2023
February 2023
March 2023
April 2023
May 2023
June 2023
July 2023
August 2023
September 2023
October 2023
November 2023
December 2023
January 2024
February 2024
March 2024
April 2024
May 2024
June 2024
July 2024
August 2024
September 2024
October 2024
November 2024
December 2024
January 2025
February 2025
March 2025
April 2025
May 2025
June 2025
July 2025
Count of Eviction Notices Count of Unlawful Detainers
notices for the same property. Note that some property managers issue separate notices for unpaid rent and utility charges, while others combine these notices. Issuing notices separately could potentially increase the perceived number of notices issued at a given property. Only two properties issued combined notices, with one eviction notice issued at each property.

As is shown in Table D-1, of the 2,108 eviction notices issued citywide, the largest portion were at Artistry Emeryville apartments (28.9 percent), followed by The Courtyards at 65th Street (22.2 percent), Parc on Powell (15.9 percent), Avenue 64 (10.0 percent), Emme (7.2 percent), and Bay House (3.8 percent).

The properties that had the most eviction notices overall also had some of the highest rates of eviction notices per unit (see Table D-1). Some smaller properties with few overall units also experienced high rates of notices per units, including 1026 47th Street (1 notice per unit), 1063 47th Street (1 notice per unit), and 1029 47th St (0.9 notices per unit). However, it is worth noting that some of these cases may have included duplicate notices or situations where the same tenant received multiple notices over a short period.

Properties with only one eviction during the analysis period were not analyzed for eviction notices per unit, and information on the number of units per building was not always publicly available for buildings with fewer than four units.

The number of unique addresses that received eviction notices, with individual apartment units being counted separately, are as follows:
• June to December 2022: 26
• January-December 2023: 293
• January-December 2024: 369
• January-December 2025: 300
• Notices without a date: 25
Table D-1: Emeryville Properties with the Highest Rates of Eviction Notices, January 2022 to July 2025 Total Units
Number of
Eviction Notices
1/2022-7/2025
Rate of
Eviction
Notices per
Unit
Percent of
Total Eviction
Notices
Citywide
Artistry Emeryville 261 609 2.3 28.9%
The Courtyards 331 468 1.4 22.2%
Parc on Powell 172 335 1.9 15.9%
Avenue 64 224 211 0.9 10.0%
Emme 190 152 0.8 7.2%
Bay House 284 80 0.3 3.8%
Subtotal 1,462 1,855 1.3 88.0%
Citywide Total Data
unavailable 2,108 N/A 100.0%
Source: City of Emeryville, 2025
Causes for Eviction Notice Filings
Failure to pay rent or utilities was the reason for 2,021 of the 2,108 eviction notices (95.9 percent).

According to the BAHFA regional study, which looked at eviction filings from July to December 2023, this was also the most common reason for evictions in Hayward, Mountain View, San Jose, Oakland, and Berkeley, which were the only jurisdictions where BAHFA studied the causes listed in notices. In each of these jurisdictions, at least 85 percent of eviction notices were issued due to nonpayment of rent. This indicates that high rates of nonpayment are not unique to Emeryville but are a symptom of the housing affordability challenges throughout the Bay Area.

In Emeryville, there were 15 notices issued for a breach of the rental contract during the analysis period, two eviction notices were listed as being for both a breach of the rental contract and the tenant engaging in illegal activities, one was due to a breach of the rental contract and a violation of an occupancy restriction, one was due to the tenant failing to allow the landlord access to the unit, and one eviction occurred due to a tenant violating the health and safety code. Only 12 of the 2,108 eviction notices issued during this period occurred for “no fault” reasons. As shown in Table D-2, those reasons include landlord move-in, removal of the unit from the market, and substantial renovations (0.5 percent of all eviction notices). An additional 55 notices did not list a cause for eviction.

Table D-2: No-Fault Eviction Notices by Reason, January 2022 to July 2025 No Fault Eviction Reason Count of Eviction Notices Percentage of All Eviction Notices
Landlord Will Move Into Unit 6 0.3%
Landlord Will Remove Unit from
Market
3 0.1%
Unit will be Substantially
Renovated
3 0.1%
Total 12 0.5%
Source: City of Emeryville, 2025
Unpaid Rent and Utilities
The City of Emeryville tracked whether the unpaid charges alleged by the landlord were for rent or utilities (the utilities category also included any other types of fees, including parking). Of the 2,021 notices that were issued due to failure to pay rent, utilities, or both rent and utilities, the majority (80 percent) were due to unpaid rent. The average amount of rent owed was $2,600.58, where the highest amount owed was $49,176.95 and the lowest amount owed was $20.00. Very low amounts may be due to clerical errors on the notice but may also have been pretextual evictions issued to give landlords the opportunity to raise rents. Of the 1,628 notices that were specifically for unpaid rent, 268 were for amounts less than $1,000.

As is noted in Table D-3, the average unpaid rent amount in 2022 was $10,989.87, while in the years following the average unpaid rent amount was between $2,379.25 and $2,538.52. This substantial difference may be partly due to a combination of a lower number of eviction notices filed in this period, as well as high amounts of unpaid rent accrued during the COVID-19 eviction-ban period. In 2024 and 2025, the only years in which unpaid utility rents were the cause for eviction notice filings, average unpaid utility amounts were under $300.

Table D-3: Count of Eviction Notices for Unpaid Rent and/or Utilities and Unpaid Amounts by Year and Type, 2022-2025
Count of
Eviction Notices
Lowest
Amount
Highest
Amount
Average
Amount
Median
Amount
2022
Rent 30 $105.84 $21,342.00 $10,989.87 $12,634.64
Utilities 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Rent and Utilities 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
2023
Rent 466 $122.57 $19,970.00 $2,379.25 $2,299.00
Utilities 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Rent and Utilities 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
2024
Rent 581 $20.00 $39,960.00 $2,426.57 $2,177.00
Utilities 204 $4.51 $3,888.77 $284.45 $204.47
Rent and Utilities 2 $2,600.00 $18,889.00 $10,744.50 $10,744.50 2025
Rent 476 $30.00 $49,176.95 $2,538.52 $2,158.69
Utilities 98 $35.95 $998.54 $282.12 $261.60
Rent and Utilities 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Source: City of Emeryville, 2025
Note: The table does not include notices where failure to pay rent was alleged but no rent amount or types of charges were included. Eleven notices were omitted for this reason.

Nineteen percent of notices in this category were issued for unpaid utility payments (383 notices). The average unpaid utility amount across the whole analysis period was $283.27, where the highest unpaid amount was $3,888.77 and the lowest was $4.51. As with notices related to unpaid rent, some smaller amounts may be clerical errors. Of notices issued for nonpayment of utilities, 71 were issued for payments of less than $100.Often, tenants receive separate eviction notices for unpaid rent and utilities charges. In two cases, unpaid rent and utility charges were included on the same notice. There were 11 notices that alleged failure to pay rent but did not list an amount owed, and 8 of these 11 also did not identify whether the unpaid amount was in rent or utilities.

Errors in Notices
Almost two-thirds of eviction notices submitted to the City (64.8 percent) had one or more errors. In this case, errors are defined as notices that lack information that is required or typically included on a notice, notices with a cause for eviction that is not permitted, notices missing the required attached lease, or late submittal of a notice. The majority of all notices (57.2 percent) had only one error. The most common error was not attaching a copy of the rental agreement to the notice. Of notices that had at least one error, 79.5 percent did not include a copy of the rental agreement. Other common errors were failing to report the number of units owned (12.9 percent of notices with at least one error) or late submittal (8.6 percent of notices with at least one error)). There were 44 notices with a missing or incomplete eviction form or substantial substitute, which represents 3.2 percent of notices that had at least one error.

Appendix C. Stakeholder and
Community Outreach
Introduction
The City recognizes the importance of input from stakeholders and community members to inform potential revisions to the City of Emeryville’s Residential Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance (ordinance) or other tenant protection programming.

To obtain this input, PlaceWorks and City staff conducted one-on-one interviews and online surveys between October 2025 and January 2026.

PlaceWorks contacted 15 landlords and property managers with properties in Emeryville and 4 local advocacy and legal aid organizations to request a brief interview about evictions and fair housing issues. Of these, two property managers and three advocacy and legal aid organization representatives were willing to complete interviews.

Concurrently, the City hosted the online survey Emeryville Eviction and Tenant Protection Survey, which was designed to obtain input from renters, property owners and property managers. Responses were received from 76 renters in Emeryville, 23 owners and managers of rental properties in Emeryville and 28 others, which included:
• Residents of other communities, including those interested in living in Emeryville • Property managers or landlords in other communities
• Former Emeryville residents
• Homeless community members
• Property owners in the city that are not landlords
• Community advocates and landlord-tenant attorneys in the Bay Area • Realtors in the area
Subsequently, to obtain additional input from owners and managers of rental properties in Emeryville, the City hosted a follow-up online survey Emeryville Landlord and Property Manager Survey and received three responses.
.

Findings
Need for Training on Changes to Laws
A need for more education about existing laws and available resources was a common theme in responses to both the survey and interview questions. Some noted that tenants may have a particular need for more education, as property managers in larger companies or well-resourced landlords may have access to legal services providers that can advise them on eviction and fair housing laws. Additionally, many property owners and managers that responded to the survey expressed that they had not accessed fair housing training but also did not identify any barriers to participating or indicated that they didn’t find such training necessary. This suggests that focusing landlord or property manager education on changes to laws rather than existing laws may be more useful to this group.

Need for Greater Access to Housing Counseling or Other
Services
Tenants who responded to the survey had accessed a number of services for assistance with tenant-landlord counseling, legal-aid services or other fair housing training. However, some respondents who had received a notice to terminate tenancy (often colloquially referred to as an eviction notice) reported having issues accessing resources, and tenants may not be finding the correct resources to support them. A representative from ECHO Housing suggested that smaller landlords may be less aware of the ordinance and its requirements and may need additional education on their rights and responsibilities. A number of tenant respondents also noted having experienced a variety of types of harassment from their landlords.

Need for Housing Inspection and Strategies to Require
Maintenance
Among the tenant respondents to the outreach survey who have experienced harassment from their landlord, the most common type of harassment was “withholding or threatening to withhold repairs or maintenance.” Tenants recommended shifting to a proactive housing inspection model rather than the current reactive process. ECHO Housing noted that tenants often say landlords are not addressing necessary maintenance or repairs in a timely manner. Tenants also suggested several strategies for supporting tenants that could be made available to tenants when landlords are not completing necessary maintenance. This could include allowing tenants to put rent in escrow until repairs are made or providing emergency housing or relocation assistance.

Requiring landlords to provide temporary relocation assistance during the period of repair is considered a best practice. It is also recommended that the City pursue funding opportunities in order to provide relocation assistance. The California Department of Real Estate 2025 Guide to Residential Tenants’ and Landlords Rights and Responsibilities recommends escrow as a strategy in cases where repair needs are unmet, suggesting that the City does not need to take further action to make this option available to tenants1.

Recommendations for Changes to the Tenant Protection
Ordinance and Programming
A tenant advocate from Centro Legal de la Raza recommended prohibiting no-fault evictions during the school year for households with school-aged children and requiring extended notice periods for Ellis Act evictions, particularly for senior residents. Similar additional protections are discussed further in Appendix A.

Based on PlaceWorks’ interview with a tenant advocate from Centro Legal de la Raza, setting a minimum amount of money owed for non-payment evictions can prevent pretextual evictions based on nominal amounts. Additionally, should the City implement a rental assistance program, requiring the landlord to provide the tenant with the necessary documentation for a rental assistance application could provide a future defense against evictions. Additionally, requiring payment of some or all of the relocation fees prior to the last day of tenancy can provide a defense against evictions when fees aren’t paid and can help ensure payment on a schedule that is more supportive of tenants.

Requiring landlords to demonstrate specific facts to support the basis for their eviction, including requiring them to demonstrate that the violation is causing material damage or a demonstrable problem, can also prevent pretextual evictions or evictions that are not permitted by the ordinance.

Emeryville Eviction and Tenant Protection Survey
Methodology
The City published a public survey focused on the experiences that tenants, property owners, and property managers in Emeryville have had with eviction and other fair housing issues covered by the ordinance. The first question asked respondents to identify whether they are a renter, property owner or property manager. Based on the 1 State of California Department of Real Estate. (2025). “California Tenants: A Guide To Residential Tenants’ and Landlords’ Rights and Responsibilities, 2025 Edition”. https://www.dre.ca.gov/publications/ResourceGuidebook/2025_Landlord_Tenant_Guide.pdf response to this question, the survey led to more targeted questions designed for each group.

The survey was published on October 27th and was open through December 10th. The survey was posted on City social media, linked to the City’s tenant resources webpage, and sent out through the Housing e-mail list as well as directly to property managers for distribution. Flyers with QR codes linking to the survey were also distributed to some businesses within Emeryville.

Types of Respondents
Figure C-1 shows the distribution of respondents by group. The survey received 127 responses. Of those, 76 (59.8 percent) are renters living in Emeryville, 15 (11.8 percent) own property in the city, 8 (6.3 percent) manage property in the city, and 28 (22.0 percent) selected “none of the above”.

Figure C-1: Distribution of Respondents by Category
Source: City of Emeryville, 2026
Tenants in Emeryville
The largest share of respondents (76, or 59.8 percent) were renters within Emeryville.

Of these, 65 (85.5 percent) had not accessed any services such as tenant-landlord counseling, “know your rights” training or information, or legal-aid services within the past three years. Meanwhile, some respondents sought these types of services at the following organizations or resources:

I am a renter living in
Emeryville., 59.8%
I own rental property
in Emeryville., 11.8%
I manage a property
in Emeryville., 6.3%
None of the above.,

22.0%
• Oakland Superior Court
• Berkeley Rent Board
• City of Emeryville
• Online resources (not specified)
• Local lawyers
• Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity (ECHO) Housing
• State website listing statewide regulations
Some of these resources were accessed prior to the renters moving to Emeryville.

Some respondents sought assistance related to habitability issues or landlord harassment, tenant/landlord rights, or looked for information on rental assistance or limits to rent increases. When given the opportunity to discuss barriers they faced, several responded that they didn’t know these services were available or would appreciate knowing about available services. Others identified that time is a barrier to accessing assistance. Two respondents reached out for assistance to various organizations but were never contacted by the organization.

Of the 76 tenants, 20 or 26.3 percent have experienced harassment from their landlord.

The most common type of harassment was “withholding or threatening to withhold repairs or maintenance” (11 respondents, 14.4 percent of tenants), followed by “interfering with the tenant’s right to quiet use and enjoyment of the rental unit, and/or verbally assaulting and harassing tenant” (nine respondents, or 11.8 percent of tenants). Seven respondents (9.2 percent of tenants) had a landlord who improperly accessed their unit. Four respondents (5.2 percent of tenants) had a landlord who either tried to influence them to leave through fraud, intimidation, or coercion, or refused to accept or acknowledge receipt of rent payment. Two respondents (2.6 percent of tenants) had a landlord who made efforts to prevent tenant organizing. One respondent had been threatened with physical harm by their landlord, and one had their personal property removed from the rental unit by the landlord.

The majority of the 76 tenant respondents (57, or 75.0 percent of tenants) had never worked with other tenants to organize for changes from their landlord, joined a tenants’ union, or worked with an outside tenant organizer to help solicit changes from their landlord. A much smaller share (5, or 6.5 percent of tenants) had engaged in these activities. A small share (4, or 5.2 percent of tenants) preferred not to say.

The largest share of tenant respondents (55, or 7.2 percent of tenants) had not experienced temporary displacement within the past three years due to repair or rehabilitation of the unit. Some respondents (11, or 14.4 percent of tenants) experienced displacement. For three of them it lasted one week or less. For another three, it lasted 30 days or less, and five were displaced for 31 days or longer.

A few tenants (6 or 7.8 percent) have received a notice to terminate tenancy (referred to as an eviction notice in the survey) within the last three years. Two of them voluntarily moved out as a result of receiving the notice, and one was transferred to another unit due to mold, while the remaining three did not move out voluntarily. Two of the respondents who received an eviction notice sought counseling or meditation and legal aid, and two sought rental assistance. Two respondents were unable to obtain the assistance that they sought, either because the agency did not respond to their request or because the organizations they contacted did not provide assistance. This may suggest that tenants are not finding the correct organizations to ask for assistance or that current resources aren’t sufficient to meet the needs of tenants.

Tenants who have received an eviction notice were asked what information or support would have been helpful when facing eviction. One of them was able to negotiate a significant rent reduction but still needed rental assistance and were not able to receive it. Another respondent had several recommendations, including asking the City to provide access to inspectors without requiring landlord involvement, and suggesting that the City conduct proactive housing inspections rather than relying on tenant complaints.

At present, the City conducts inspections based on reported complaints. This respondent recommended providing emergency housing or relocation assistance when units are unsafe. This respondent suggested a City licensing requirement for landlords so that landlords who engage in unsafe or illegal practices can have such licenses revoked. The City currently requires business licenses but does not have an additional license for property rental. Respondents also suggested giving tenants the ability to put rent in escrow until repairs are made, which is an existing avenue of recourse that does not require additional City action.

Three respondents reported having experienced no-fault eviction. Of these, one received relocation assistance, one did not, and the third was unsure.

Demographics
Tenant respondents were also asked a series of demographic questions to understand what populations in the community are represented by these responses. As shown in Figure C-2, the largest group of respondents were between the ages of 30 and 39 (22 or 28.9 percent of tenant respondents) followed by 40 to 49 (13 or 17.1 percent of tenant respondents). Age categories in American Communities Survey data are different than those listed in the survey, but according to the2020-2024 American Community Survey, 22.4 percent of Emeryville households have a householder between the ages of 20 and 29, 32.2 percent have householders between the ages of 30 and 39, and 12.1 percent have a householder between the ages of 40 and 49. This may suggest that younger households were underrepresented in this survey. Just over 15 percent of survey responses were received from tenants aged 60 or over. While this is a minority of tenant respondents, as is shown in Figure C-3, according to 2020-2024 American Community Survey data, just over 15 percent of renter-occupied households in Emeryville have householders aged 60 or over, so this response rate is roughly proportionate to the population as a whole.

Figure C-2: Ages of Tenant Respondents
Source: City of Emeryville, 2026
Figure C-3: Ages of Emeryville Population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2020-2024 18-29, 3.9%
30-39, 28.9%
40-49, 17.1%
50-59, 14.5%
60-69, 6.6%
70-79, 5.3%
80 or older, 3.9%
Prefer not to say,

3.9%
Blank, 15.8%
0-19, 8.1%
20-29, 22.4%
30-39, 32.2%
40-49, 12.1%
50-59, 9.8%
60-69, 7.5%
70-79, 4.6% 80 or older, 3.3%
Note: Due to differences between the age categories in the survey and the American Community Survey, there are slight differences in the categorization of persons aged 18 and 19 between Figures C-2 and C-3.

As shown in Figure C-4, the largest shares of tenant respondents identified as white (22, or 28.9 percent) and a slightly smaller share identified as Black or African American (21, or 27.6 percent). Some respondents selected more than one response in this category. According to the 2020-2024 American Community Survey reporting on householder demographics, populations that may have been underrepresented by this survey include white renters (37.1 percent of renter householders compared to 28.9 percent of tenant respondents), Asian or Asian American renters (21.5 percent of renter householders compared to 2.6 percent of tenant respondents), Hispanic or Latino renters (14.6 percent of renter householders compared to 9.2 percent of tenant respondents), and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander renters (0.9 percent of renter householders compared to 0.0 percent of tenant respondents). Some of these respondents may have instead selected “none of the above/prefer not to say” or left this question blank. Black or African American respondents were slightly over-represented among responses, with 27.6 percent of respondents self-identifying in this category compared to 26.1 percent of householders in renter households in Emeryville selfidentifying in this category.

Figure C-4: Racial or Ethnic Identity of Tenant Respondents Source: City of Emeryville, 2026

5.3%

2.6%

27.6%

9.2%

0.0%

5.3%

28.9%

13.2%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%
American
Indian
or Alaska
Native
Asian or
Asian
American
Black or
African
American
Hispanic or
Latino
Native
Hawaiian
or other
Pacific
Islander
Multiracial White None of
the above/
prefer not
to say
Figure C-5: Racial or Ethnic Identity of Emeryville Renters Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2020-2024 Note: Categories in Figure C-5 are based on the categories used in the American Community Survey and vary slightly from the categories in Figure C-4. Total is greater than 100.0 percent because Hispanic or Latino of Any Race may be selected in addition to other categories.

Of all tenant respondents, 18, or 23.7 percent reported having a household member with a disability and 15, or 19.7 percent, reported having a household member that is a member of the LGBTQIA+ community. 12 or just over 15 percent of tenant respondents reported having a household member under the age of 18, while 11 or 14.5 percent reported having a household member over the age of 65.

Property Owners and Managers in Emeryville
Of the 127 respondents to the survey, 23 (18.1 percent) either own property in the city (15 or 11.8 percent of all survey respondents), or manage rental property in the city (5 or 3.9 percent of all survey respondents). Of these 23 property owner and manager respondents, 5 or 21.7 percent said that they have accessed services such as tenantlandlord counseling, “know your rights” training or information, or legal-aid services within the past three years. Only three offered specific sources for the information they accessed, which included the Berkeley Rent Stabilization program, a workshop that may have been provided by ECHO (based on the respondent’s description), and a John

1.4%

21.5%

26.1%

14.6%

0.9%

7.8%

37.1%

5.2%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%
American
Indian and
Alaska
Native
Asian Black or
African
American
Hispanic or
Latino
Origin of
Any Race
Native
Hawaiian
and Other
Pacific
Islander
Two or
more races
White Some other
race
Stewart Company fair housing training. Of the remaining property owner and manager respondents, 18 (78.3 percent) had not accessed these services, many responded that they were not needed and that there were no particular barriers that prevented them from accessing them. One respondent didn’t know about the existence of such services, and another expressed a lack of trust in them. When asked what resources on property management and tenant relations would be helpful, 12 (or 52.1 percent) of the property owner and manager respondents selected “FAQs on the City’s website” and another 12 responded that a fact sheet on all applicable regulations would be helpful. Six selected self-paced online training modules, and four selected periodic in-person training sessions.

Sixteen (or 69.5 percent) of the 23 property owner and manager respondents provided information about how many units they own or manage. Twelve of the 23 (52.1 percent) own or manage four or fewer units within Emeryville, two own or manage between 5 and 25 units in the city, one owns or manages between 26 and 75 units in the city, and one owns or manages 76 or more units in Emeryville. Seven of the 23 (25 percent) do not own or manage property outside of Emeryville. An additional five (21.7 percent) own or manage four units or fewer outside the city. Two own or manage between 5 and 25 and two own or manage 76 or more units outside the city. No respondents own or manage between 26 and 75 units outside the city. This indicates that respondents tended toward smaller landlords and property managers, with a few owners or property managers of larger portfolios.

Half of the 12 respondents who own or manage four or fewer units within Emeryville do not own or manage any units outside of Emeryville. Four of the 12 own or manage four or fewer units outside the city, one owns or manages between 5 and 25 units outside the city, and one owns or manages 76 or more units outside the city. Therefore, a small number of the owners or property managers that responded to this survey who would be categorized as small landlords for purposes of the city’s ordinance may have the same access to resources as a larger landlord due to owning or managing properties elsewhere.

Sixteen of the 23 property owner and manager respondents 69.5 percent) also provided information about how many property managers are employed at their company. Taking into account the details provided within “other” responses, one respondent indicated that they hire independent contractors, one did not know how many property management staff their company employed, and the remainder had between zero and ten property management employees.

Sixteen of the 23 property owner and manager respondents 69.5 percent) answered a question about whether they or the employees of their company have received training about the City’s Landlord and Tenant Relations Ordinance. Twelve of the 16 (52.1 percent of all property owner and manager respondents) had not. Of the remaining four, one noted that maintenance contractors had not, two indicated that they were not part of a company, and one had received training.

When asked to discuss “for cause” evictions that have occurred in their Emeryville properties within the past three years, 15 of the 23 (65.2 percent) property owner and manager respondents selected that no notices to terminate tenancy (referred to as eviction notices in the survey) had been issued. One respondent had issued notices to terminate tenancies in the city due to breach of rental contract and violations of the applicable health and safety code. With regard to “no fault” evictions, 14 respondents answered that they had not issued any such notices to terminate tenancy in the past three years. One respondent has issued a notice to terminate tenancy for a landlord move-in, and one responded that they had issued notices to terminate tennacy both to remove the unit from the market and for the landlord to move in.

Respondents were given the opportunity to provide details regarding whether “for cause” evictions were generally able to be resolved before an unlawful detainer was filed. One respondent said no, and one respondent noted that they have residential services staff working with residents and that they work with third parties to collect back pay. They were also given space to identify how many notices to terminate tenancy have resulted in filing an unlawful detainer against a tenant for property in Emeryville.

Three of the four landlords or property managers who responded to the question either entered a variation of “none” or “not applicable”. One respondent answered that two unlawful detainers had been filed within the past three years.

When asked if they had other thoughts to share, responses were varied. One property owner offered that having PDFs of necessary forms and agreements available was very helpful when they set up their rental property for the first time. Another lives in one of their four units and stated that they are close to their tenants and hope to never have cause to evict them. One of the property managers offered that in their experience, person-to-person effort can prevent litigation and suggested that Oakland’s mediation service could be worth imitating. Two property managers objected to government control or restrictions on owners and managers. One of these responses suggested that requiring proof for evictions was an issue, as finding witnesses that are willing to testify against their neighbor is a challenge.

Other Respondents
The first survey question asked respondents to identify whether they are a renter, property owner or property manager. Twenty-eight of the 127 respondents (22.0 percent) selected “none of the above” and were asked what description of them would be more accurate. Though not all 28 respondents responded to this question, those that did included members of the following groups:
• Residents of other communities, including those interested in living in Emeryville • Property managers or landlords in other communities
• Former Emeryville residents
• Homeless community members
• Property owners in the city that are not landlords
• Community advocates and landlord-tenant attorneys in the Bay Area • Realtors in the area
These respondents were asked to share any thoughts about evictions and tenant protections that they wanted to share with the City. These responses reflected the variety of perspectives in this group.

One respondent suggested that buyers of properties that are currently rented should be able to move into the rented unit and additionally recommended that the City host workshops to educate renters on the benefits of homeownership. One respondent also suggested educational workshops, in this case focused on evictions and tenant protections. An attorney offered that, based on their experiences, evictions have gone up in recent years due to lingering COVID debts and suggested that landlords and property managers need more education on laws that effect rental properties. A resident of a neighboring community who works with landlord and tenants described a discrepancy in access to legal assistance between landlords and tenants. Many landlords, they noted, have access to attorneys if they need it, whereas tenants may not know where to seek that sort of support and may move out of their property out of fear and lack of knowledge. They recommended that tenants be given information about their rights by their landlord, a practice which is already in place in the city.

One community member from a neighboring community noted that strong renter protections have been very beneficial for them, and another commented that rents in the area are too high. A local community advocate recommended a rent control policy.

A former Emeryville resident expressed concerns about hazardous environmental conditions in their former building and felt that the building’s owner was not required to address these issues, to the detriment of residents. A landlord from a different community thinks that landlords and tenants should have the same rights and protections without partiality or discrimination between the two groups.

Emeryville Landlord and Property Manager Survey
As noted in the Introduction, only 2 of the 15 landlords and property managers who were asked to complete an interview were willing to do so. Some landlords and property managers expressed hesitancy about participating in an interview and including their company’s name in the study. The online survey Emeryville Eviction and Tenant Protection Survey received 23 responses from owners and managers of rental properties in Emeryville. To supplement the 2 interviews with landlords and property managers, the City hosted an additional online survey Emeryville Landlord and Property Manager Survey to allow this group to provide greater detail regarding their experiences with the Landlord and Relations Ordinance. This additional survey provided an opportunity for landlords and property managers to provide additional comments while remaining anonymous. Three property owners and managers responded.

All three respondents described that they work with tenants who are behind on rent or utility payments, and two described providing resources to the tenants, such as helping them to access rental assistance programs. To deal with issues not relating to nonpayment of rent, one property manager described their process as sending a 3-day Notice to Perform Covenants or Quit, while the other two landlords discussed efforts to work with their resident services staff to resolve issues that caused the lease violation after providing a lease violation notice. One of the three property managers mentioned that they have never had to serve an unlawful detainer, and another stated that issues are typically resolved before an unlawful detainer must be issued. The third was not able to quantify the rate of unlawful detainers at the property.

When asked if there are any elements of the Emeryville eviction form that are unclear, all three said no. Only one of the three responded that they or other staff from the property have participated in tenant-landlord mediation.

One of the respondents mentioned that they don’t have challenges related to providing relocation assistance, as tenants must have renter insurance for that reason. This is a response that may warrant additional investigation or landlord education. Another respondent said that they don’t experience challenges while providing relocation assistance but provided no further details. Another respondent said that they had run into challenges when providing relocation assistance. This respondent recommended that the City implement a program to assist tenants with past-due rent, as Emeryville tenants have a hard time not being able to access a type of assistance that would be available if they lived in Oakland.

Stakeholder Interviews
To gain more detailed input from community stakeholders, PlaceWorks contacted 15 landlords and property managers with properties in Emeryville and 4 local advocacy and legal aid organizations to request a brief interview about evictions and fair housing issues. Of these, two property managers and three advocacy and legal aid organization representatives were willing to complete interviews. Additionally, PlaceWorks conducted a brief interview with a representative from the City of West Hollywood to discuss challenges and successes related to the implementation of their Tenant Protection Ordinance and associated programs.

Advocates and Legal Aid Services
PlaceWorks spoke with representatives from ECHO Housing, a HUD-approved housing counseling agency that the City of Emeryville contracts with to provide counseling services to the city’s tenants and landlords on a range of housing issues. These issues include habitability, eviction, and more. The City also refers individuals to ECHO for counseling. PlaceWorks also spoke with Centro Legal de la Raza, a legal aid clinic based in Oakland. A second representative from ECHO Housing provided interview responses by e-mail.

ECHO Housing
When asked about the most typical housing issues faced by their clients, the representatives from ECHO Housing noted that they have seen an increase in calls asking about the eviction process and whether the notices they’ve been served comply with legal requirements. Additionally, they noted that many of their clients are dealing with landlords that are not addressing necessary maintenance or repairs in a timely manner.

They estimated that 70 percent of their clients with at-fault evictions are able to cure issues, thereby preventing their landlord from filing an unlawful detainer lawsuit These tenants have been able to negotiate an arrangement to cure the issue with their landlord or provide their landlord with proof of having cured the issue. However, this is typically not the case where the reason for the eviction is due to non-payment of rent. They noted that while they don’t see harassment in every case, they have seen situations where landlords have entered tenants’ units illegally or put undue pressure on tenants to pay rent.

When groups of tenants have reached out to the organization, ECHO Housing provides guidance and assistance. However, their ability to take further action is limited to informing the landlord of any wrongdoing or defending against invalid notices or actions that violate the law. In such cases, ECHO Housing reaches out to landlords directly to provide them with the ordinance information and guide them on how to properly serve notices. If a landlord issues a tenant a notice to terminate tenancy, they are required to provide the City with a copy; however, that does not always happen. When assisting clients who have received a notice to evict, ECHO Housing checks in with the City Clerk’s office to make sure that the City has received a copy. If it wasn’t received, they’ll let the landlord know that the notice is voided until they comply with the requirement.

They recommended that the City strengthen tenant protections with stricter enforcement of existing housing laws and providing clearer guidance to both tenants and landlords about their rights and responsibilities and about the counseling resources available to them. One of the representatives described a situation in which tenants in Union City reached out to ECHO Housing to have them review their notice. The notice wasn’t in compliance, but the landlord wasn’t aware that the ordinance existed and was thankful for the information. They suggested that smaller property owners in particular aren’t necessarily aware of the ordinance itself.

Centro Legal de la Raza
Representatives from Centro Legal de la Raza (“Centro Legal”) provided an overview of common eviction and tenant protection issues among the clients they serve. Central Legal also identified some practices and ordinances from nearby cities which could be of note to the City of Emeryville and made specific recommendations for the City’s Ordinance.

Speaking about clients throughout the East Bay, the representative from Centro Legal identified non-payment of rent as one of the biggest issues with regard to eviction defense. Lease violations or conduct allegations are less frequent but can be easier for landlords to manufacture. Outside of evictions, habitability issues related to neglected repairs are common client concerns. It is rare for one of the representative’s clients to be able to cure a violation ahead of an unlawful detainer filing.

The representative highlighted that in Oakland, the city’s ordinance has identified a landlord not providing the necessary documentation for a tenant’s rental assistance program application as a defense against evictions for nonpayment. They also pointed to a provision in Oakland that requires evictions for non-payment to be equal to or greater than one month of fair market rent as determined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Emeryville may consider implementing the same type of requirement. As described in Appendix D: Trends in Notices to Terminate Tenancy, of the 2,021 notices that were issued due to failure to pay rent, rent and utilities, or utilities, in 2021, the majority (80 percent) were due to unpaid rent. Of the 1,628 notices that were specifically for unpaid rent, 268 were for amounts less than $1,000. Very low amounts may be due to clerical errors on the notice but may also have been pretextual evictions issued to give landlords the opportunity to raise rents.

For tenants with nonpayment-related evictions, the time period between receiving a notice to terminate tenancy and having an unlawful detainer filed is typically not long enough to cure the issue, even though weekends and holidays are no longer counted as part of the time to respond. Additionally, some nuisance-based issues, such as subletting, are not curable.

Outside of Emeryville, some tenants have organized to form tenant associations with the support of other organizations such as Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) Action, but Centro Legal does not always have capacity to support tenant associations. The majority of Centro Legal’s work is eviction defense, and they cannot take all of the cases that come to the organization. However, they will provide training to tenant groups about their rights or help draft letters for the tenant associations.

In eviction situations, Centro Legal often sees tenant harassment alongside the eviction process. This most typically occurs as landlords abusing the right to entry or refusing to cash rent checks. Sometimes landlords will illegally inquire about the tenant’s immigration status. The representative noted the importance of having a local ordinance that spells out specific actions that are considered harassment, which is already in place in Emeryville. Typically, if there is a chance that a tenant can receive damages, Centro Legal will refer the case to a private attorney. However, they also identified challenges with clients finding an attorney that will take on a low-level lawsuit such as tenant harassment. Having an ordinance that includes a minimum level of damage or requires the payment of attorney fees can incentivize that. Emeryville’s ordinance does not require a minimum amount of damage but does permit tenants to seek damages and entitles tenants to costs and reasonable attorney fees if the notice of termination of tenancy is invalidated. If the landlord successfully demonstrates compliance during the civil action, the landlord is entitled to costs and reasonable attorney fees.

Centro Legal indicated that few of their clients receive relocation assistance in the manner dictated by law. However, they have been able to get relocation payment included as part of a settlement, including in cases where such a payment is not required by law. The representative indicated that ordinances such as Oakland’s, which require half of the relocation to be paid at the time the notice is served, can be very helpful for eviction defense, as cases can easily be dismissed if the landlord has not complied with the relocation assistance requirement. Alternatively, the City of Oakland can pay the relocation fees directly and put a lien on the home. Emeryville’s ordinance presently requires relocation fees to be paid by the last day of tenancy. However, requiring some or all of the payment of relocation fees to be made earlier can provide a defense against evictions when fees aren’t paid and can help ensure payment on a schedule that is more supportive of tenants, and so is considered a best practice.

In some cases that Centro Legal has supported, landlords provide reasons for eviction that are not permitted under state or local just-cause eviction laws. These are most commonly in situations where a landlord is either not being advised by an attorney or, more commonly, where the eviction is pretextual, such as when the landlord identifies a minor lease violation in order to remove the tenant for other reasons. The representative highlighted ordinances in Hayward and Alameda County that have a specificity requirement, which forces landlords to allege specific facts from the beginning. The representative also recommended that landlords alleging lease violations be required to show that the violation has caused material damage or is otherwise causing a demonstrable problem. Though the City’s required notice to terminate tenancy requires landlords to indicate a reason for the notice, further details are not required, and the ordinance does not require that the violation be shown to be causing material damage.

Revising this requirement could help to prevent pretextual evictions.

Additional tenant protection provisions that were recommended by the Centro Legal representative include prohibiting no-fault evictions during the school year for households with school-aged children and requiring extended notice periods for Ellis Act evictions, particularly for senior residents. These are not currently included in the City’s ordinance but are considered best practices.

Landlords and Property Managers
PlaceWorks spoke with a representative from a non-profit housing developer that works throughout northern California. PlaceWorks also spoke with a representative from a forprofit property management company.

Non-Profit Housing Organization
The representative from the housing non-profit noted that, because their properties are covered by the CARES act, the timeline for notices to terminate tenancy for nonpayment to has shifted to 30 days rather than 3. Property managers also discuss receivables with the organization’s Resident Resource staff on a weekly basis so that Resident Resource staff can reach out to residents if there is a payment issue. If overdue balances are less than $100, property managers will accept the next month’s rent and then re-issue the notice the next month so that the tenant has more time to work through the payment issue. While the organization is open to working with residents on issues of non-payment, they require a stipulated agreement for any payment plan in order to ensure that the residents understand the severity of the issue.

The organization is also open to a mutual termination agreement. In those cases, they may elect to forgive a small amount of debt and return the tenant’s full deposit in order to help them make their next step forward.

The non-profit housing organization works with an outside legal team for mediation with tenants and to ensure compliance with local laws, including relocation assistance requirements. Staff at the organization receive fair housing training internally. The City’s notice to terminate tenancy is uploaded into the YARDI system, so it is not difficult for property management staff to complete.

The non-profit housing representative noted that telling tenants to look at their leases for information is not as helpful as it sounds, as the lease for EAH properties is 89 pages long. Tenants also may not know the differences between local ordinances, and so may be confused as to why friends living in other cities have different rights and resources.

For-Profit Property Management Company
The representative from the for-profit property management company asked to remain anonymous. They said that reminder notices are sent to tenants both physically and digitally when those tenants are behind on rent, and that a second attempt to contact the tenant is made before a notice to terminate tenancy is issued. In situations other than non-payment, the company also partners with legal services providers to identify whether eviction reasons are permitted. When they have run into behavioral issues in the past, they notify the tenant of the issue in order to allow them to address the issue.

The representative noted that all of the behavioral issues they’ve encountered were cured successfully. For payment-related evictions, the representative estimated that between 70 and 75 percent either develop a payment plan to prevent the eviction or enter into a stipulated agreement in order to avoid a sheriff’s lock-out.

The company regularly provides fair housing trainings and has never engaged in mediation with a tenant or tenant group. The company’s legal services provider prepares any notices to terminate tenancy, and the property management company has not had any challenges with providing relocation assistance. The representative noted that the current ordinance is very clearly written and encouraged the City to proactively reach out to property managers with the information as soon as possible so as to give property management staff time to be trained in the new regulations.

City of West Hollywood
PlaceWorks conducted an interview with a staff person from the Rent Stabilization Division at the City of West Hollywood about challenges and successes they have had in implementing their Tenant Protection and Rent Stabilization ordinances. The City of West Hollywood was selected for an interview because the City is comparable to Emeryville in its smaller, densely developed character and also has a robust tenant protection program. Appendix A. Local Tenant Protection Ordinances: Best Practices and Existing Conditions and Appendix B. Policy Comparison Table includes additional information about the City of West Hollywood’s tenant protections.

The representative noted that there are no elements of the ordinance that cause compliance challenges, as most landlords in the city know the laws and are willing to ask the City questions. The City has an online sign-up form for either in-person or virtual meetings with City staff, available to both tenants and landlords. The City also has forms available online for both landlords and tenants, including a harassment complaint form that is escalated to the City Prosecutor’s office.

The representative noted that it can be challenging for the City to pursue some compliance issues, such as incorrect payment of deposit interest, as they become a civil suit. In these circumstances, the City works to provide resources for tenants. However, tenants can request a hearing based on a substantial reduction in housing services or failure to perform maintenance, a rent overcharge, or a request to determine the maximum allowable rent. Hearings are conducted with an independent hearing examiner at City Hall during working hours. The representative noted that hearing process has been very successful at resolving the types of disputes that are eligible for a hearing.

While the rental registry process provides the City with a lot of useful information on rents, the representative noted that the City does not actively track rents. Instead, tenants can schedule a hearing if they believe they are being charged rents that are not in line with the City’s rent stabilization ordinance. The City can also use the rental registry data to check notices to terminate tenancy for compliance and to support code inspection actions.

The representative also described that for no-fault evictions related to addressing code violations, the Building Official is very involved in the process of determining whether or not an eviction is warranted based on the scope of work. However, there is no set time limit after which a temporary relocation based on necessary health and safety repairs becomes an eviction.
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
City of Emeryville Page 1 of 6
Members:

Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur
Vice Mayor Matthew Solomon
Council Member David Mourra
Council Member Kalimah A. Priforce
Council Member Courtney Welch

CITY OF EMERYVILLE

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL
Emeryville City Hall
1333 Park Avenue
Emeryville, CA 94608
(510) 596-4300 phone
(510) 450-7831 fax
www.emeryville.org
Tuesday, September 01, 2026 7:00 PM Council Chambers

1. CALL TO ORDER - REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM
The meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL

Present: Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur, Vice Mayor Matthew Solomon, Council Member David Mourra

Absent: Council Member Kalimah Priforce, Council Member Courtney Welch Council Member Priforce was absent 7:01 p.m. – 7:22 p.m.

3. APPROVAL OF FINAL AGENDA
MOVED by Solomon and SECONDED by Mourra
RESULT: Passed [3 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra,
NOES: None
ABSENT: Priforce, Welch
RECUSE: None

4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY

4.1. AC TRANSIT BUDGET AND SERVICE UPDATE PRESENTATION

5. COUNCIL MEMBER SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS ON MEETING ATTENDANCE The City Council presented flowers to City Manager LaTanya Bellow for completing her Doctorate Degree, City Attorney John Kennedy for completing the Harvard Leadership Program, and to City Clerk April Foran for her supportive role.

City Council MINUTES September 01, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 2 of 6

6. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

7. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
No ex parte communications were reported.

8. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR CONSENT AGENDA AND ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 1 speaker.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
MOVED by Mourra and SECONDED by Solomon to approve the Consent Calendar, excluding items 9.11 and 9.13 which were pulled by Council Member Priforce.

RESULT: Passed [4 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra, Priforce
NOES: None
ABSENT: Welch

9.1. ALL ORDINANCES DEEMED READ BY TITLE ONLY AND ALL FURTHER READING WAIVED

9.2. ACTION MINUTES OF THE JULY 21, 2026, CLOSED SESSION

9.3. ACTION MINUTES OF THE JULY 21, 2026, CITY COUNCIL MEETING

9.4. ACTION MINUTES OF THE JULY 28, 2026, SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING

9.5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING THE 2026 AMENDMENT OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE'S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE

9.6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AND EXPEND A GRANT FROM THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF

TRAFFIC SAFETY, SELECTIVE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (STEP) TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 FOR IMPROVING TRAFFIC, BICYCLE, AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY WITHIN THE CITY AND INCREASE THE FY 26/27 BUDGET BY $50,000

9.7. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT AND EXPEND A GRANT FROM THE CHP CANNABIS TAX

FUND GRANT PROGRAM (CTFGP) TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $154,881.90 FOR REDUCING IMPAIRED DRIVING AND IMPROVING TRAFFIC, BICYCLE, AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY WITHIN THE CITY AND INCREASE THE FY26/27 BUDGET BY $154,881.90

9.8. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR STATE DISABILITY INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR

CITY EMPLOYEES

9.9. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING AND

ADOPTING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF

EMERYVILLE AND CONFIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATIVE MANAGERIAL PROFESSIONAL City Council MINUTES September 01, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 3 of 6
(CAMP), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, AND APPROVING THE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S COMPENSATION PLAN IN CONFORMANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 2, SECTION 570.5

9.10. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING AND

ADOPTING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF

EMERYVILLE AND THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL (SEIU) 1021, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING, AND APPROVING THE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY’S COMPENSATION PLAN IN CONFORMANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 2, SECTION 570.5

9.11. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH OPERATION DIGNITY, INC. TO PROVIDE HOMELESS SUPPORT SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $345,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027, $362,250 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027-2028, AND $380,363 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2028-2029 FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,087,613, AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 OPERATING BUDGET TO INCREASE REVENUE IN FUND 219 (OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUND) BY $42,141 AND INCREASE EXPENDITURES IN FUND 219 (OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUND) BY $40,000 AND INCREASE EXPENDITURES IN FUND 298 (HOUSING SUCCESSOR FUND) BY $50,000
MOVED by Mourra and SECONDED by Solomon to approve
0 speakers.

RESULT: Passed [3 TO 1]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra
NOES: Priforce
ABSENT: Welch

9.12. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF

ALAMEDA AND THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CARRYING OUT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 OPERATING BUDGET TO INCREASE REVENUE IN FUND NO 205 BY $62,164 AND INCREASE EXPENDITURES IN FUND NO. 205 BY $59,664

9.13. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES CONTRACT WITH CHARMIN ROUNDTREE-BAAQEE DBA ART IS LUV INCREASING THE CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $247,000 TO AN AS-AMENDED TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $545,000 AND EXTENDING THE CONTRACT TERM TO JUNE 30, 2028 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH

ADVANCEMENT OF THE ARTS CENTER PROJECT INCLUDING ORGANIZATIONAL

DEVELOPMENT AND NONPROFIT FORMATION, AND AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 BUDGET TO TRANSFER $247,000 FROM FUND 475 (GENERAL CAPITAL) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. CF-09 (ART CENTER) TO THE OPERATING BUDGET ACCOUNT 1800-80050 (PROFESSIONAL SERVICES) MOVED by Solomon and SECONDED by Mourra to approve
City Council MINUTES September 01, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 4 of 6
0 speakers.

RESULT: Passed [4 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra, Priforce
NOES: None
ABSENT: Welch

9.14. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PUBLIC HIGHWAY AT-GRADE CROSSING AGREEMENT WITH UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY FOR THE 67TH STREET AT-GRADE

RAILROAD CROSSING

9.15. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE ACCEPTING THE

WORK AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION WITH

THE COUNTY RECORDER FOR THE CITY SEWER LATERAL REHABILITATION PROJECT PERFORMED BY MONARCH PLUMBING AND ROOTER INC. FOR CIP PROJECT NUMBER 20650006 (FM-15)

9.16. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE TO AUTHORIZE THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PRECISION CONCRETE INC. FOR ON-CALL SIDEWALK

SURVEY AND REPAIRS AS PART OF THE SUSTAINABLE STREETSCAPES PROJECT (SUT-01) TO EXTEND THE CONTRACT TERM TO DECEMBER 31, 2027

9.17. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH EKI ENVIRONMENT & WATER, INC. TO INCREASE THE TOTAL COMPENSATION BY $94,000, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $535,500, FOR

ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES RELATED TO HORTON LANDING PARK, EPW 17-112 (CIP NO. 16475006)

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS

10.1. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE ESTABLISHING THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 PROPERTY TAX LEVY RATES OF $44.61 PER $100,000 IN ASSESSED VALUE FOR THE SECURED TAX ROLL AND $47.30 PER $100,000 IN ASSESSED VALUE FOR THE UNSECURED TAX ROLL FOR THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE’S MEASURE C (AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOND) GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND SERIES 2023

INDEBTEDNESS
Council Member Priforce was absent 8:25 pm. – 8:30 p.m.

The Public Hearing opened at 8:25 p.m.
0 speakers.

The Public Hearing closed at 8:30 p.m.

MOVED by Mourra and SECONDED by Solomon to approve
RESULT: Passed [3 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra,
NOES: None
City Council MINUTES September 01, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 5 of 6
ABSENT: Priforce, Welch

11. ACTION ITEMS

11.1. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 2026 ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTION PACKET MOVED by Mourra and SECONDED by Solomon to direct Mayor Kaur to oppose the resolution in the packet.

RESULT: Failed [2 TO 2]
AYES: Solomon, Mourra
NOES: Kaur, Priforce
ABSENT: Welch
MOVED by Priforce and SECONDED by Kaur to direct Mayor Kaur to approve the resolution in the packet.

RESULT: Failed [2 TO 2]
AYES: Kaur, Priforce
NOES: Solomon, Mourra
ABSENT: Welch

12. DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS

12.1. ANNOUNCEMENT OF COMMISSION/COMMITTEE VACANCIES

12.2. Community Development Director’s Report on Planning Commission Actions at the August 27, 2026 meeting:

1. Sutter Hospital Medical Center Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Scoping Session (PUD25-001). A public Scoping Session to accept comments from responsible agencies and the public about the scope of the EIR that will be prepared for the proposed Sutter Hospital Medical Center. This meeting gives the public and the Planning Commissioners an early opportunity to weigh in on the topics the Draft EIR should address, including traffic, air quality, noise, and other environmental issue areas.

The City of Emeryville, as CEQA Lead Agency, will issue a Notice of Preparation on August 14, 2026, opening a 30-day public review period during which written comments may also be submitted. The proposed project consists of a new 330-foot tall, 785,000 square foot hospital building; a new 55,600 square foot building for either medical office use or a 57-unit residential building; and conversion of two existing buildings to medical office uses totaling 563,200 square feet. General Plan Land Use Designation:

Office/Technology; Zoning Designation: PUD-3 (Applicant/Owner: Sutter Health) (APNs: 49-1558-2; -4;-5;-6; 49-1544-2;49-1041-29-1)

2. Boot Barn Signage (SIGN26-007). A Major Sign Permit for one illuminated wall sign and three signs on the tower structure for Boot Barn at 3938 Horton Street, Suite 200.

CEQA Status: This project is exempt from environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15311(a) which applies to accessory structures including onpremise signs, and the “general rule” at Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposal may have a significant effect on the environment. General Plan Land Use Classification: Mixed-Use with Residential City Council MINUTES September 01, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 6 of 6
and Regional Retail Overlay. Zoning District: MUR Mixed Use with Residential, RR Regional Retail Overlay, and PP Pedestrian Priority Zone. (Applicant: David Ford/All Sign Services) (Owner: Benderson Development) (APN: 007-0617-022)

13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS
Mayor Kaur requested and received majority support for an item regarding the League of California Cities Annual Conference Resolution packet on the September 15, 2026, City Council meeting.

14. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were adopted at a regular meeting of the Emeryville City Council.
/s/ April Foran, CMC
City Clerk
City of Emeryville Page 1 of 2
Members:

Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur
Vice Mayor Matthew Solomon
Council Member David Mourra
Council Member Kalimah A. Priforce
Council Member Courtney Welch

CITY OF EMERYVILLE

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION
Emeryville City Hall
1333 Park Avenue
Emeryville, CA 94608
(510) 596-4300 phone
(510) 450-7831 fax
www.emeryville.org
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 6:45 PM Council Chambers

1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:45 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL

Present: Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur, Vice Mayor Matthew Solomon, Council Member Kalimah Priforce, Council Member David Mourra, Council Member Courtney Welch

Absent: None

3. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
No ex parte communications were reported.

4. PUBLIC COMMENT (on Closed Session items only)
0 speakers.

5. CLOSED SESSION - CITY OF EMERYVILLE

5.1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PENDING CLAIMS, Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(e)(3):

5.1.1. Claim of Leyan Peng - EM2026-9

5.2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS, Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:

City Council MINUTES September 15, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 2 of 2

5.2.1 Agency Designated Representatives: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager; Lilybell Nakamura, Human Resources Director; Jeff Bailey, IEDA; John Kennedy, City Attorney
Unrepresented Employees

6. REPORTING OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney John Kennedy announced that there was no reportable action taken.

7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 6:59 p.m.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were adopted at a regular meeting of the Emeryville City Council.
/s/ April Foran, CMC
City Clerk
City of Emeryville Page 1 of 3
Members:

Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur
Vice Mayor Matthew Solomon
Council Member David Mourra
Council Member Kalimah A. Priforce
Council Member Courtney Welch

CITY OF EMERYVILLE

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL
Emeryville City Hall
1333 Park Avenue
Emeryville, CA 94608
(510) 596-4300 phone
(510) 450-7831 fax
www.emeryville.org
Tuesday, September 15, 2026 7:00 PM Council Chambers

1. CALL TO ORDER - REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL

Present: Mayor Sukhdeep Kaur, Vice Mayor Matthew Solomon, Council Member David Mourra, Council Member Kalimah Priforce, Council Member Courtney Welch

Absent: None

3. APPROVAL OF FINAL AGENDA
MOVED by Welch and SECONDED by Solomon
RESULT: Passed [5 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra, Priforce, Welch
NOES: None

4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY

4.1. PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE RECOGNIZING

SEPTEMBER AS CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS MONTH

5. COUNCIL MEMBER SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS/REPORTS ON MEETING ATTENDANCE

6. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

6.1. STRATEGIC PLAN / QUARTERLY GOALS UPDATE

7. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
No ex parte communications were reported.

City Council MINUTES September 15, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 2 of 3

8. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR CONSENT AGENDA AND ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 4 speakers.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
MOVED by Welch and SECONDED by Mourra to approve the Consent Calendar, excluding items

9.4 which was pulled by Mayor Kaur, 9.5 which was pulled by Council Member Mourra, and 9.8 which was pulled by Mayor Kaur.

RESULT: Passed [5 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra, Priforce, Welch
NOES: None

9.1. ALL ORDINANCES DEEMED READ BY TITLE ONLY AND ALL FURTHER READING WAIVED

9.2. WARRANTS

9.3. ACTION MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 1, 2026, CLOSED SESSION

9.4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING AND

ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN IN CONFORMANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 2, SECTION 570.5 0 speakers.

MOVED by Welch and SECONDED by Solomon
RESULT: Passed [5 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra, Priforce, Welch
NOES: None

9.5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH AP3 TRANSPORTATION, LLC TO OPERATE THE “8 TO GO” PARATRANSIT SHUTTLE SERVICE PROGRAM FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $110,000 WITH $50,000 TO BE CHARGED TO FUND 254, AND $60,000 TO BE CHARGED TO FUND 263 0 speakers.

MOVED by Solomon and SECONDED by Mourra
RESULT: Passed [5 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra, Priforce, Welch
NOES: None

9.6. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE 2026 DROWNING PREVENTION GRANT FROM THE

CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION FOR PARKS & RECREATION, THE CHARITABLE PARTNER OF

THE CALIFORNIA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY, IN THE AMOUNT OF ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($1,500) AND APPROPRIATE THE REVENUE TO OTHER

GRANTS IN THE GENERAL FUND AQUATICS DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (ACCOUNT 5420-55300) AND INCREASE THE EXPENDITURES FOR City Council MINUTES September 15, 2026
City of Emeryville Page 3 of 3
HOURLY STAFFING WITHIN THE AQUATICS DIVISION (ACCOUNT 5420-71040) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027

9.7. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE ACCEPTING A DONATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,600 FROM AVA COMMUNITY ENERGY TO THE

COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO SUPPORT ANNUAL COMMUNITY EVENTS

9.8. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING AN UPDATE TO THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE’S TITLE VI PROGRAM AND ASSURANCES 0 speakers.

MOVED by Solomon and SECONDED by Welch
RESULT: Passed [5 TO 0]
AYES: Kaur, Solomon, Mourra, Priforce, Welch
NOES: None

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS

11. ACTION ITEMS

11.1. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 2026 ANNUAL CONFERENCE RESOLUTION PACKET 0 speakers.

MOVED by Mourra and SECONDED by Welch oppose the resolution in the League Conference packet.

RESULT: Passed [3 TO 2]
AYES: Solomon, Mourra, Welch
NOES: Kaur, Priforce

12. DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS

12.1. ANNOUNCEMENT OF COMMISSION/COMMITTEE VACANCIES

13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS
Council Member Mourra requested and received majority support for a Study Session on the Flock ALPR and its data use.

Council Member Priforce requested and received majority support for a City of Refuge Ordinance.

14. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were adopted at a regular meeting of the Emeryville City Council.
/s/ April Foran, CMC
City Clerk
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
City of Emeryville

C A L I F O R N I A

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: October 6, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: April Foran, City Clerk
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE

ALLOWING THE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE, COMMISSION ON

AGING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE,

HOUSING COMMITTEE, AND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE

TO SET THEIR OWN REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULES, AND

TRANSFERRING PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE VACANCY

APPOINTMENTS FROM THE BUDGET AND GOVERNANCE

COMMITTEE TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution to allow the Budget Advisory Committee, Commission on Aging (COA), Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC), Housing Committee, and Parks and Recreation Committee to set their own regular meeting schedules on an annual basis. Additionally, staff recommends that Public Art Committee (PAC) vacancy appointments be made by the Community Services Committee instead of the Budget and Governance Committee.

BACKGROUND
At the November 18, 2025 City Council meeting, the Council approved Resolution No. 25-106, allowing the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) and the Public Art Committee (PAC) to set their own regular meeting schedules on an annual basis. All committees and commissions were previously required to set their meeting schedules by Council resolution and required new Council action each time there was a requested schedule change. The Housing Committee membership has asked for a meeting schedule change, so this item is before Council to allow meeting schedule flexibility for all committees and commissions.

At a Study Session on September 2, 2025, the City Council approved moving the Advisory Body application review to the Council Committees, with recommendations for appointment approved by the full Council. This process was instituted during the 2026 annual recruitment. The Budget and Governance Committee recommended appointments to the Budget Advisory Committee, EDAC, Housing Committee, and PAC.

The number of appointments was voluminous, and staff is now recommending that the PAC appointments be moved to the Community Services Committee.

AB Meeting Schedule Flexibility and PAC Appointments to Community Services City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

DISCUSSION
Meeting Schedules
Setting advisory body meeting schedules by City Council resolution is time consuming and allows for little flexibility within the advisory bodies as changes need a long leadtime to institute based on Council meeting schedules. Staff recommends that the City Council allow the Budget Advisory Committee, COA, EDAC, Housing Committee, and Parks and Recreation Committee to set their own schedules by majority vote of the membership. The item would be agendized, the membership would set their schedule for the year, and the schedule would be posted on the website.

Council Committee Application Review for Advisory Body Appointments During the annual Advisory Body appointment process in May 2026, the Budget and Governance Committee had close to 30 applications to review for appointment recommendations on four committees (Budget Advisory, EDAC, Housing Committee, and PAC). The Community Services Committee had 15 applications to review for appointment recommendations on two committees (COA and Parks and Recreation Committee). Staff is recommending that appointments to the PAC be assigned to the Community Services Committee to help more evenly spread the workload for Council Committees. The PAC in their mission to review public art and related matters, also aligns more closely with the Community Services Committee.

The table below outlines the proposed appointing bodies and changes:

Advisory Body # of
Members
Proposed Appointing
Body
Other notes
BPAC 9 Transportation &
Sustainability Committee
Budget Advisory 5 Budget & Governance
Commission on Aging 7 Community Services
EDAC 9 Budget & Governance
Housing Committee 7 Budget & Governance
Parks & Recreation 7 Community Services
Public Art 9 Community Services Was Budget &
Governance
Planning Commission
& Others
various Full City Council

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact related to this item.

AB Meeting Schedule Flexibility and PAC Appointments to Community Services City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

STAFF COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC
There has been no communication with the public related to this item.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There is no conflict of interest related to this item.

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council allow the Budget Advisory Committee, Commission on Aging (COA), Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC), Housing Committee, and Parks and Recreation Committee to set their own regular meeting schedules on an annual basis. Additionally, staff recommends that Public Art Committee (PAC) vacancy appointments be made by the Community Services Committee instead of the Budget and Governance Committee.

PREPARED BY: April Foran, City Clerk

ATTACHMENTS
▪ Draft Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE ALLOWING

THE BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE, COMMISSION ON AGING, ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, HOUSING COMMITTEE, AND PARKS

AND RECREATION COMMITTEE TO SET THEIR OWN REGULAR MEETING

SCHEDULES, AND TRANSFERRING PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE VACANCY

APPOINTMENTS FROM THE BUDGET AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE TO THE

COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, setting advisory body meeting schedules by Council resolution is time consuming and allows for little flexibility as membership changes; and WHEREAS, the City Council currently allows the Public Art Committee and Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee to set their annual schedules by majority vote of the committee; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the Budget Advisory Committee, Commission on Aging, Economic Development Advisory Committee, Housing Committee, and Parks and Recreation Committee also be allowed to set their annual schedules by majority vote of the committee; and
WHEREAS, during the annual advisory body appointment process the Budget and Governance Committee had a voluminous number of applications to review for four committees, while Community Services had a much more manageable number of applications for two committees; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that appointments to the Public Art Committee be assigned to the Community Services Committee to help more evenly spread the workload for Council Committees; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that the Budget Advisory Committee, Commission on Aging, Economic Development Advisory Committee, Housing Committee, and Parks and Recreation Committee be allowed to set their annual schedules by majority vote of the committee; and, be it, further RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that appointments to the Public Art Committee be assigned to the Community Services Committee.

Resolution No. _____
AB Meeting Schedule Flexibility and PAC Appointments to Community Services City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville at a regular meeting held October 6, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

MAYOR
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
City of Emeryville

C A L I F O R N I A

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: October 6, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Lilybell Nakamura, Human Resources Director SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE

APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE

UNREPRESENTED COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS IN

CONFORMANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLE
2, SECTION 570.5

RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends that the City Council of the City of Emeryville approve the resolution amending the Compensation and Benefits Plan.

DISCUSSION
The City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations state that Human Resources shall recommended a Compensation and Benefits Plan and that the City Council shall approve amendments to the Plan by resolution. The Police Chief position proposed salary increases are consistent with the other unrepresented Department Head positions and represented employees.

Salaries
▪ Provides a salary increase of three percent (3%) effective the first full pay period following City Council approval.
▪ Provides a one-time lump sum payment equivalent to the value of a three percent (3.0%) salary increase (including all premium pays) for the period of July 13, 2026, through the implementation of the three percent (3.0%) salary increase referenced above.
▪ Provide a market adjustment increase of one percent (1%) effective the first full pay period following City Council approval.
▪ Provides a salary increase of three percent (3%) effective first full pay period in July 2027.
▪ Provides a salary increase of three percent (3%) effective first full pay period in July 2028.

Additionally, the Uniform Allowance language was revised to comply with CalPERS reporting rules.

Police Chief Update to the Unrep Comp and Benefits Plan City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

FISCAL IMPACT
The estimated cost of the changes to the Unrepresented Compensation Plan for the Police Chief is approximately $6,068 over the approved Fiscal Year 2026 budget. The increased cost will be included within the FY2026 mid-year budget process, at which time the Council will approve the increased appropriation. The costs associated with the second and third year of the plan will be included within the next biennial budget, which Council will adopt in June 2027.

STAFF COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC
There has been no communication with the public.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There is no conflict of interest.

CONCLUSION
The City Manager recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution approving an amendment to the Compensation and Benefits Plan.

PREPARED BY: Lilybell Nakamura, Human Resources Director

ATTACHMENTS
▪ Draft Resolution
o Exhibit A – Compensation and Benefits Plan tracked changes o Exhibit B – Compensation and Benefits Plan clean
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING

AND ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE UNREPRESENTED COMPENSATION

AND BENEFITS IN CONFORMANCE WITH CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLE 2, SECTION 570.5
WHEREAS, the Emeryville City Council has previously adopted and periodically amended the Compensation and Benefit Plan for Unrepresented Employees (the “Plan”); and
WHEREAS, the Police Chief is subject to the Plan as an unrepresented employee of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Emeryville City Council approves the Plan and changes to the City’s compensation schedule and benefits for applicable classifications that are subject to the Plan consistent with related classifications to maintain internal relationships and avoid compaction; and
WHEREAS, the Emeryville City Council desires to amend certain benefits for the Police Chief that are subject to the Plan to be consistent with related classifications; and WHEREAS, the Emeryville City Council finds that the terms and conditions of the proposed changes are proper and in the best interest of the City; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Emeryville approves and adopts the amendment to the Police Chief’s compensation and benefits effective October 6, 2026 attached hereto and authorizes the City Manager to take such further actions as may be necessary to implement the Plan including any necessary nonsubstantive modifications; and be it further BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if any provisions related to the Plan contained herein are found to be in conflict with provisions of any other previous resolutions related to the Plan, the provisions herein shall prevail.

Resolution No. _____
Police Chief Update to the Unrep Comp and Benefits Plan City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026

ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville at a Regular Meeting held October 6, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

MAYOR
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY

ATTACHMENTS
▪ Exhibit A – Compensation and Benefits Plan Tracked Changes ▪ Exhibit B – Compensation and Benefits Plan clean

CITY OF EMERYVILLE
COMPENSATION and BENEFITS PLAN
For
Unrepresented Employees
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2028
(Where conflicts exist, the provisions of this document supersedes those outlined in the City of Emeryville Personnel Rules and Regulations)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I. CLASSIFICATIONS ...............................................................................................1 SECTION II. COMPENSATION ...................................................................................................1 SECTION III. BENEFITS..............................................................................................................2 SECTION IV. PAID TIME OFF.....................................................................................................9 APPENDIX A – MONTHLY WAGE SCHEDULE.....................................................................13 APPENDIX B – HOURLY WAGE SCHEDULE ........................................................................14

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
1 SECTION I. CLASSIFICATIONS
The classifications that are participating in this Compensation and Benefit Plan for Unrepresented Employees are those identified below:

Department Head Confidential/Management
Administrative Services Director
Assistant City Manager
City Clerk
Community Development Director
Community Services Director
Finance Director
Human Resources Director
Information Technology Director
Police Chief (safety)
Public Works Director
Human Resources Manager
Human Resources Analyst
Senior Human Resources Analyst
Police Officer Trainees Temporary/Part-time
Police Officer Trainees Intern
Pool Manager
Public Service Employee
Recreation Leader
SECTION II. COMPENSATION
A. Compensation Policy
The City of Emeryville (herein referred to as Employer) policy is to establish and maintain a general structure based on marketplace norms and internal job values with pay ranges.

Salary ranges will be reviewed and updated as necessary based on marketplace survey data, internal relationships, and financial conditions.

B. Basic Plan Elements Structure
The compensation plan includes separate salary ranges for Department Head, Confidential/Management, Police Officer Trainees, and temporary/part-time unrepresented employees. Each salary range, which represents the range of what the Employer is willing to pay for the performance of a set of duties and responsibilities, is typically a 25% spread for non-exempt classifications, and a 35% spread for exempt classifications, from the minimum to the maximum rate. All unrepresented employees covered by this Compensation Plan will be paid a salary within the range, as determined by performance.

C. Cost of Living Adjustments for Department Head, Confidential/Management and Police Officer Trainee Classifications
Effective September 20, 2026 all unrepresented Department Head (except Police Chief), Confidential/Management and Police Officer Trainee classifications shall receive a salary increase of three percent (3%).

In addition to the salary increase, the City will provide a one-time lump sum payment Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
2 equivalent to the value of a three percent (3%) salary increase (including all premium pays) for the period of July 12, 2026, through the implementation of the three percent (3%) salary increase referenced above.

Effective the first full pay period in July 2027 all unrepresented Department Head, Confidential/Management and Police Officer Trainee classifications shall receive salary increase of three percent (3%).

For Police Chief
Effective the first full pay period following City Council approval the Police Chief shall receive a salary increase of three percent (3%).

In addition to the salary increase, the City will provide a one-time lump sum payment equivalent to the value of a three percent (3%) salary increase (including all premium pays) for the period of July 12, 2026, through the implementation of the three percent (3%) salary increase referenced above.

Market Adjustment
Effective the first full pay period following City Council approval the Police Chief shall receive a market adjustment increase of one percent (1%),
Effective the first full pay period in July 2027, the Police Chief shall receive salary increase of three percent (3%).

Effective the first full pay period in July 2028, the Police Chief shall receive salary increase of three percent (3%).

Provides a salary increase of three percent (3%) effective first full pay period in July 2028.

D. Cost of Living Adjustments for Temporary/Part-time classifications Effective July 1, 2026, the salary ranges for unrepresented temporary/part-time classifications shall be increased by two and two-tenths percent (2.2%) per the Minimum Wage Ordinance.

SECTION III. BENEFITS
A. Group Health and Welfare Benefits (except for Temporary/Part-Time)

1. Medical Benefit
The Employer shall continue to contract with the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) for the purpose of providing medical benefits for eligible active employees, eligible retired employees and eligible survivors of retired employees.

The Employer shall provide a contribution to the flexible benefits plan (Section 125 Cafeteria Plan) for each full-time active employee in regular or probationary status Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
3 enrolled in one of the CalPERS medical insurance plans offered by the Employer in accordance with Government Code Section 22892.

Effective the first full pay period following Council approval, the Employer will pay 90% of the selected plan premium, which includes the minimum contribution amount required by Government Code Section 22892. Contributions provided under this Section are required only to the extent mandated by Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA).

Effective the first full pay period following Council approval, the employee will pay 10% of the selected plan premium which shall be withheld from the employee's salary by the Employer on a pretax basis.

2. Medical In-Lieu/Alternate Benefit
Employees shall be allowed an opportunity to select certain options as alternatives to those benefits listed in Section III of this Memorandum of Understanding under the following terms. Eligibility for receipt of alternative benefits is restricted to those employees for whom no City contribution is made towards premiums for group medical insurance because the employees have opted out and have coverage from a source other than the City. In order to receive the medical in-lieu/alternate benefit, employees must meet all the requirements of an Eligible Opt-Out Arrangement.

The requirements that must be satisfied for the Eligible Opt-Out Arrangement are as follows:
(a) The Participant must have minimum essential coverage ("MEC") through another source (other than coverage in the individual market and other than individual coverage through Covered California);
(b) The Participant and all individuals in the Participant’s expected tax family have (or will have) the required minimum essential coverage. A Participant’s expected tax family includes all individuals for whom the Participant reasonably expects to claim a personal exemption deduction for the taxable year(s) that cover the Participant's plan year to which the opt-out arrangement applies; (c) The Participant must provide reasonable evidence of the MEC for the applicable period. Reasonable evidence may include an attestation by the Participant; (d) The Participant must provide the evidence/attestation every Plan Year; (e) The Participant must provide the evidence/attestation no earlier than a reasonable time before coverage starts (e.g. open enrollment). The evidence/attestation may also be provided within a reasonable time after the Plan Year starts; and
(f) The medical in-lieu/alternate benefit cannot be made (and the City must not in fact make payment) if the City knows or has reason to know that the Participant or tax family member does not have the alternative coverage.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
4 The City shall contribute ninety percent (90%) of the Kaiser - Region 1, single party premium per month for alternate benefits for eligible full-time employees who select and are eligible for the medical-in-lieu/alternate benefits.

The medical-in-lieu/alternate benefit is provided to the employee as a cash payment that supplements to the employee's monthly compensation. State and Federal taxes will be withheld on any monies applied to this option.

3. Dental Benefit
The Employer shall purchase and pay the full cost of coverage for employee and eligible dependent up to the family level. The Employer reserves the right to provide dental care benefits under a plan or through a carrier of its choice. Alternate coverage may be provided through a consortium of public agencies or private employers which may be formed for the purpose of providing dental care benefits for employees; or through a program of self-insurance.

4. Vision Benefit
The Employer shall pay the full cost of coverage for employee and eligible dependent up to the family level under the Vision Service Plan (VSP). The Employer reserves the right to provide vision care benefits under a plan or through a carrier of its choice. Alternate coverage may be provided through a consortium of public agencies or private employers which may be formed for the purpose of providing vision care benefits for employees; or through a program of selfinsurance.

5. Reservation of Rights
The Employer reserves the right to provide medical, dental or vision care benefits under a program other than that offered through the CalPERS or other existing benefit arrangements at any time during the term of this Plan. Alternate coverage may be provided through a consortium of public agencies or private Employers which may be formed for the purpose of providing medical, dental and vision care benefits for employees; or through a program of self-insurance.

If, at any time, the Employer reaches an agreement with the recognized employee organizations for the City’s miscellaneous represented employees, whereby premium caps are set at a rate higher than those listed above, the Employer agrees to revisit the medical plan premium share arrangement for unrepresented employees provided for in this Compensation and Benefits Plan document.

6. Health Care Legislation
In the event that either the State of California or the federal government produces legislation which requires a change in the benefits provided under this Plan, or imposes an employee or an Employer contribution requirement toward the cost of such benefits, Employer shall have the right to adjust its contributions so that its total contribution is no greater than is required under this Plan and shall have a duty to provide any benefits lost through such legislation through a supplemental health Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
5 plan. In the event that the cost of such additional benefits exceeds the total Employer contribution required by this Plan, employees will be informed of alternative plan design which conforms with the legislation and any necessary adjustments in contribution levels for both Employer and the employees covered hereunder.

7. Employee Assistance Program
Employees are eligible to participate in a free, confidential counseling and referral service designed to help them or members of their immediate household resolve personal problems that may be interfering with work and home life. The plan provides a set number of visits per year, at no cost to the employee or eligible family members.

8. Life Insurance
The Employer shall pay the entire cost of providing each regular and probationary full-time employee with group term life insurance equal to the individual's annual base salary (rounded to the next highest $1,000). This policy will include Accidental Death & Dismemberment coverage, and the right of conversion at the time of termination from employment to a form of permanent coverage without medical restrictions, to the extent allowable by the insurance carrier and the law.

The payment for such converted coverage shall be the sole responsibility of the individual electing such coverage.

For Permanent Part-Time employees, the Employer shall provide group term life insurance in an amount equivalent to the employee’s annualized salary, rounded to the nearest $1,000.

Miscellaneous Benefits (for Department Head and Confidential/Management Classifications only)

1. Flexible Spending (FSA) and Dependent Care (DCAP) Accounts Employer agrees to allow employees to designate a specific amount of salary, consistent with applicable public law, to be redirected each month to pay for Health Care and Dependent care costs on a pre-tax basis. The Employer will reimburse such employee on a monthly basis for health care and dependent care from such redirected funds, upon presentation to the designated third-party administrator of a claim and receipt for services rendered. Any unused funds will be administered in accordance with applicable Federal law. Federal law limits the circumstances under which an employee may elect benefits and change an election under the Flexible Benefits Plan.

2. Participation in the California Government Voluntary Employee Benefits Association (CALGOVEBA)
All employees in Department Head, and Confidential/Management classifications will participate in the CalGOVEBA ("VEBA") 501(C)9 Trust pursuant to the agreement attached as Exhibit B and may be amended from time to time pursuant Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
6 to the requirements of such agreement. Participation will be subject to and governed by all IRS requirements applicable to the VEBA and employees will be subject to the provisions of such agreement as may be revised.

3. Retired Employees Health Benefits
The Employer shall contribute the minimum employer health premium contribution required under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA) toward CalPERS medical insurance premium. Employees hired prior to July 1, 2002, or employees with eleven (11) or more years of continuous service, are eligible for the following retiree health benefits:

Medical Dental Vision
Retiree $162.00 $20.00 $5.00
Retiree + One Dependent $286.00 $35.00 $8.68
Retiree + Two or more Dependents $363.00 $46.00 $8.68
The medical benefit includes PEMHCA. The Employer shall contribute the greater of the medical benefit amount shown above or the applicable PEMHCA minimum contribution. The Employer's medical contribution shall be paid directly to CalPERS.

The Employer's dental and vision contributions shall be applied toward the applicable monthly premiums. The retiree shall be responsible for paying any remaining premium amount directly to the Employer.

To be eligible for the Employer's retiree health benefits described in this section, an employee must be currently enrolled in an Employer-sponsored medical (CalPERS), dental, and/or vision plan at the time of retirement. An employee who is not enrolled in an applicable plan upon retirement shall not be eligible to receive the Employer's corresponding medical, dental, or vision contribution for that plan at a later date, except as otherwise required by law.

4. Long Term Disability Insurance
The Employer shall provide, at no cost to full-time active regular employees, longterm disability (LTD) insurance with a benefit of 60% of the employee’s monthly salary, up to a benefit cap of $10,000 per month, less any other income.

5. Technology Stipend
An eligible employee who is required by the Employer to use a mobile communications device (e.g. cellular phone) in the course of their regular duties and who is not provided with such a device by the City for such use may apply for and prospectively be paid a payment of forty dollars ($40) per month to partially offset the employee’s cost of providing and using their personal device for City business. The payments will commence prospectively not later than the first of the month following their supervisor’s receipt of the employee’s application. To qualify for the payment, the employee must sign and submit a Cellular Phone Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
7 Authorization Form to their supervisor for processing and an acknowledgement that the employee has an affirmative duty to provide the employer, at the employer’s request, with all records on the device pertaining to City business. City rules concerning conduct related to the use of communications devices that apply to the use of City-owned communications devices will apply equally to the use of the employee’s personal device for City business. The City Manager or their designee will review approved applications not less than annually for the purpose of identifying employees that no longer qualify for a monthly stipend and ensuring that such stipends are terminated.

6. 457 Deferred Compensation Contribution
Department Head and Confidential/Management classifications shall have deposited into their 457 Deferred Compensation account a flat amount of twentyfive dollars ($25) in the first full pay period following each full month of employment. To be eligible for the City contribution, the employee must be enrolled in the Employer City 457 Deferred Compensation Plan on the date of payment and must have been in a paid status for all of the month prior to the date of payment.

7. Uniform Allowance (For Police Chief only)
The City will provide the Police Chief an annual initial uniform allowance of one thousand four hundred dollars ($1,400) for the purchase of articles required by the City for the affected employee's uniform. Thereafter, the annual allowance will be paid in two installments: one-half (1/2) paid on the first pay date in October and the other half (1/2) on the first pay date in March. on a biweekly basis in the amount of fifty-three dollars and eighty-five cents ($53.85).

If the employee separates from City Service, for whatever reason (except death), during the year for which the annual uniform allowance has been paid, such payment shall be adjusted on a prorated basis in relationship to the period of service for that year.

8. Education Incentive (For Police Chief only)
Effective the first full pay period following City Council approval, the City will provide a 2% incentive for employees with a master’s degree.

9. Chiropractic Care (For Police Chief only)
The City shall maintain a self-insured chiropractic benefit of two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) for verified employee chiropractic services.

B. Miscellaneous Benefits (for Department Head Classifications only)

1. Automobile Allowance and/or Uncompensated Expense
Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
8 Department Head classifications whose duties require the regular use of their personal vehicle, may be authorized a maximum payment of $275 per month.

2. Retirement
The Employer will contract with the California Public Employee Retirement System (“CalPERS”) for the “2% at 60” benefit formula, with a three (3) highest years compensation base for pension calculation, for eligible employees who are employed in classifications deemed eligible by CalPERS to participate in the CalPERS “miscellaneous” pension benefit system.

Unrepresented employees participating in the CalPERS miscellaneous pension benefit system will pay seven percent (7%) of their CalPERSable wages toward the CalPERS employee contribution.

Employee contributions made directly toward the CalPERS employee contribution for services rendered shall be made on a pre-tax basis to the extent permitted under Internal Revenue Code Section 414(h). The Employer will not treat employer contributions toward the CalPERS employee contribution as compensation subject to income tax withholding unless required to do so by applicable local, state or federal law. Each employee shall be solely and personally responsible for any Federal, State or local tax liability of the employee that may arise out of the implementation of this section or any penalty that may be imposed therefore.

Effective January 1, 2013, newly hired employees that are considered “new members” in accordance with the Public Employee Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) will be enrolled under the CalPERS Miscellaneous Employee 2% @ 62 retirement formula plan (average of highest three (3) years compensation earnable and Level III Survivor Benefits plan), in accordance with applicable law and PEPRA.

Employees enrolled in the 2% @ 62 shall contribute to the CalPERS each pay period one half the normal cost which is currently eight and a quarter (8.25%) of “PERSable” compensation toward the CalPERS employee contribution rate.

Unrepresented employees hired on or after January 1, 2012, into a classification deemed eligible by CalPERS eligible for CalPERS "safety" pension benefit plan participation shall participate in the Public Employee Retirement System under the "3% at 55" formula, with a highest average annual compensation earnable for a 12- or 36-consecutive month employment period for pension calculation.

Unrepresented employees participating in the CalPERS safety pension benefit system will pay nine percent (9%) plus the five percent (5%) employee pick up for a total of fourteen percent (14%) of their pensionable compensation toward the CalPERS employee contribution, in accordance with the CalPERS contract, effective July 1, 2017. Police Managers shall make the same level of contributions as Police Officers enrolled in the CalPERS "safety" benefit plan.

Effective January 1, 2013, newly hired employees that are considered "new members" in accordance with the Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) will be enrolled under the CalPERS Safety Employee 2.7%@ 57 retirement formula plan (average annual pensionable compensation for a 36-consecutive month period and Level III Survivor Benefits plan), in accordance with applicable Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
9 law and PEPRA. Employees enrolled in the 2.7% @ 57 shall contribute to the CalPERS each pay period in accordance with the PEPRA provisions. Government Code Section 7522.10 of the PEPRA law provides the authority for the earnings limit for all PEPRA members.

3. Severance
Employees in “at-will” classifications, as defined in the Personnel Rules and Relations for the Employer, are eligible for severance pay, equivalent to one (1) week pay for every year of service, up to a maximum of eight (8) weeks of pay, when released from employment for non-disciplinary reasons.

Severance pay shall be calculated on the basis of employee's regular straight time (hourly equivalent) rate at the time of separation, shall be paid in a lump sum, and shall not be counted as time worked for the purpose of qualifying for employment benefits.

4. Health and Wellness
Eligible employees may participate in city-sponsored activities at the Emeryville Center for Community Life (ECCL) at the posted Emeryville City resident rate as established, revised, and implemented from time to time at the discretion of the Employer.

SECTION IV. PAID TIME OFF
A. Vacation (except for Temporary/Part-Time)
An employee shall accrue vacation leave from the date of the employee's regular appointment by the Employer, each month at the rates enumerated below. Except that the City Manager has sole authorization to credit new employees with additional week(s) per year for relevant service with a prior employer. Such accrual and credit may not exceed two (2) times the annual rate of accrual. For the purpose of determining the amount of vacation entitlement, an employment year is defined as the period of one (1) year from the anniversary date of such appointment by the Employer.

Employees hired prior to July 1, 1998:
0 to 9 years: Fifteen (15) days per year
10 to 20 years: Twenty (20) days per year
21+ years: Twenty-five (25) days per year
Employees hired after July 1, 1998:
0 to 4 years: Ten (10) days per year
5 to 9 years: Fifteen (15) days per year
10 to 20 years: Twenty (20) days per year
20+ years: Twenty-five (25) days per year
Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
10 Regular Part-Time Employees
Regular part-time employees appointed to at least a 50% time status position, shall be eligible to accrue prorated vacation leave hours based on the budgeted full-time equivalent status of the position held. For example, an employee in a budgeted 75% full-time equivalent position would be eligible to accrue vacation leave at 75% of a full-time employee’s accrual level with the same years of service.

B. Sick Leave (Except for Temporary/Part-Time)
Unrepresented employees (regular and probationary) shall accrue prorated sick leave at equivalent to the budgeted full-time equivalent status of the position held. For example, an employee in a budgeted 75% full-time equivalent position would be eligible to accrue sick leave at 75% of a full-time employee with the same years of service.

Payment for Unused Leave
Employees hired before January 1, 2014, who voluntarily resign or retire from the City and provide at least two (2) weeks' notice of intent shall have the option of having their unused sick leave balance paid out. Payment of unused sick leave is limited to a maximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours for employees assigned to a 40-hour workweek or eight hundred forty (840) hours for employees assigned to a 35-hour workweek.

The payment shall be calculated by multiplying the employee's eligible unused sick leave hours by 60% of the employee's hourly base rate of pay at the time of separation. The City will pay the employee the amount calculated less the applicable CalGOVEBA contributions. Refer to the CAMP CalGOVEBA Agreement.

Employees hired on or after January 1, 2014, who have completed at least ten (10) years of continuous service and voluntarily resign or retire from the City and provide at least two (2) weeks' notice of intent shall have the option of having their unused sick leave balance paid out. Payment of unused sick leave is limited to a maximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours for employees assigned to a 40-hour workweek or eight hundred forty (840) hours for employees assigned to a 35-hour workweek.

The payment shall be calculated by multiplying the employee's eligible unused sick leave hours by 30% of the employee's hourly base rate of pay at the time of separation. The City will pay the employee the amount calculated less the applicable CalGOVEBA contributions. Refer to the CAMP CalGOVEBA Agreement.

Any unused sick leave balance above the 960 maximum hours will be reported to CalPERS for service credit consideration.

Employees who do not have a CalGOVEBA terminal leave deferral in their CalGOVEBA agreement and choose to opt out of payment for unused sick leave will have their unused sick leave hours balance reported to CalPERS for service credit consideration. Employees who separate from employment as a result of disciplinary action shall not be deemed to have separated in good standing and shall not be eligible for payment of unused sick leave under this section.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
11 C. Sick Leave Temporary/Part-time Classifications only) The Employer will provide sick leave in accordance with the California Paid Sick Leave requirements.

1. Sick Leave for Immediate Family Care
a. Definition of Immediate Family. Immediate family is defined as employee's spouse,/ -domestic partner, children, (biological, adopted, foster, step, legal wards, or children of domestic partner),siblings (step, half), grandparents, grandchildren, parents (parents in-law, step-parents),and up to one (1) designated (chosen) person per 12-month period.
b. Entitlement. An employee may use accrued sick leave in accordance with state requirements and guidelines. At the Employer's request, the employee will provide satisfactory evidence of the facts justifying such absence.

D. Bereavement Leave (Except Temporary/Part-Time)
In the event of a death in the immediate family, employees may be granted a maximum of five (5) workdays (no more than 35 or 40 hours based on designated work schedule) for paid bereavement leave for each such incident relating to matters dealing with the death of the employee's immediate family.

For the purposes of this section the ·immediate family shall include the employee's spouse/domestic partner, children (biological, adopted, foster, step, legal wards, or children of domestic partner), siblings (step, half), grandparents, grandchildren, parents (parents inlaw, step-parents), and up to one (1) designated (chosen) person per 12-month period.

At the request of the City, the employee shall furnish a death certificate and proof of relationship.

Employees must have worked for the employer for at least 30 days prior to the leave. Leave must be completed within three months after the death for whom the leave is being taken.

This provision does not apply if the death occurs while the employee is on unpaid leave of absence or layoff.

E. Administrative Leave (For Department Head and Confidential/Management Employees only)
At the discretion of the City Manager, unrepresented exempt employees shall be granted ten (10) days of Administrative Leave. Procedures governing the granting and use of Administrative Leave are provided in the City’s Administrative Instruction Manual or the Personnel Rules.

An employee may elect in advance to cash out up to ten (10) days of unused administrative leave at their base rate of pay at time of payment each fiscal year. The Employer may establish and modify the timeframe and deadline for advance election of administrative leave cash out to ensure that such leave is not subject to immediate taxation as income under state or federal law at the time it is credited to the employee.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
12 Eligible employees shall have administrative leave balances automatically cashed out at the end of the fiscal year. In no event will administrative leave be carried forward to the next fiscal year.

Eligible employees may use accrued Administrative Leave with advance scheduling approval of their respective supervisor. Employees who separate from employment with the City shall be paid any unused administrative leave up to ten (10) days, upon separation.

F. Holidays
The following holidays shall be observed by the Employer. The Employer’s offices will be closed on these days except as otherwise provided by the department head.

1. New Years’ Day (January 1)

2. Martin Luther King, Jr. Birthday (3rd Monday in January)

3. Presidents’ Day (3rd Monday in February)

4. Memorial Day (last Monday in May)

5. Juneteenth (June 19)

6. Independence Day (July 4)

7. Labor Day (1st Monday in September)

8. Indigenous Peoples’ Day (2nd Monday in October)

9. Veterans’ Day (November 11)

10. Thanksgiving Day (4th Thursday in November)

11. Day after Thanksgiving

12. Christmas Day (December 25)
The Employer’s Administrative Instruction 1114 shall govern the terms and manner of holiday observance and compensation.

Eligible employees shall be granted three (3) floating holidays each fiscal year on the first day of the first pay period beginning on or after July 1 of the respective year.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
12 Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
13 APPENDIX A (Schedule 1)

BIWEEKLY WAGE SCHEDULE
Effective September 20, 2026
Job Code Job Classification Step A Top Step
1140 Administrative Services Director 7,623.00 10,291.40 1135 Assistant City Manager 8,141.70 10,990.70
1740 City Clerk 6,140.40 8,289.40
1115 Community Development Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1545 Community Services Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1055 Finance Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1091 Human Resources Analyst 4,183.90 5,139.40
1095 Human Resources Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1090 Human Resources Manager 6,129.90 8,521.80
1154 Information Technology Director 7,623.00 10,291.40 1060 *Police Chief 9,388.629,764.00 11,735.0812,20

4.80 1250 Police Officer Trainee 3,256.80 3,418.40
1080 Public Works Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1092 Senior Human Resources Analyst 4,636.10 6,258.00
*Pending Council Approval for Increase
Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
13 Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
14 APPENDIX A (Schedule 2)

BIWEEKLY WAGE SCHEDULE
Biweekly Salaries effective first full pay period in July 2027 Job Code Job Classification Step A Top Step
1140 Administrative Services Director 7,851.20 10,600.10 1135 Assistant City Manager 8,386.00 11,320.40
1740 City Clerk 6,324.50 8,537.90
1115 Community Development Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1545 Community Services Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1055 Finance Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1091 Human Resources Analyst 4,309.20 5,293.40
1095 Human Resources Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1090 Human Resources Manager 6,314.00 8,777.30
1154 Information Technology Director 7,851.20 10,600.10 1060 *Police Chief 9,388.6210,056.80 11,735.0812,57

1.20 1250 Police Officer Trainee 3,354.40 3,520.80
1080 Public Works Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1092 Senior Human Resources Analyst 4,774.70 6,445.60
*Pending Council Approval for Increase
Add Police Chief 3rd year salaries
Biweekly Salary effective first full pay period in July 2028 Job Code Job Classification Step A Top Step
1060 Police Chief 10,358.40 12,948.00
Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
15 APPENDIX B

HOURLY WAGE SCHEDULE
Salaries effective first full pay period in July 2026
Job Code Job Classification Step A Range Top Step
1730 Intern 20.34 -41.31
1560 Pool Manager 20.34 -39.44
1795 Public Service Employee 20.34 -141.22
1590 Recreation Leader 20.34 -30.59

CITY OF EMERYVILLE
COMPENSATION and BENEFITS PLAN
For
Unrepresented Employees
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2028
(Where conflicts exist, the provisions of this document supersedes those outlined in the City of Emeryville Personnel Rules and Regulations)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I. CLASSIFICATIONS ...............................................................................................1 SECTION II. COMPENSATION ...................................................................................................1 SECTION III. BENEFITS..............................................................................................................2 SECTION IV. PAID TIME OFF.....................................................................................................9 APPENDIX A – MONTHLY WAGE SCHEDULE.....................................................................13 APPENDIX B – HOURLY WAGE SCHEDULE.........................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
1 SECTION I. CLASSIFICATIONS
The classifications that are participating in this Compensation and Benefit Plan for Unrepresented Employees are those identified below:

Department Head Confidential/Management
Administrative Services Director
Assistant City Manager
City Clerk
Community Development Director
Community Services Director
Finance Director
Human Resources Director
Information Technology Director
Police Chief (safety)
Public Works Director
Human Resources Manager
Human Resources Analyst
Senior Human Resources Analyst
Police Officer Trainees Temporary/Part-time
Police Officer Trainees Intern
Pool Manager
Public Service Employee
Recreation Leader
SECTION II. COMPENSATION
A. Compensation Policy
The City of Emeryville (herein referred to as Employer) policy is to establish and maintain a general structure based on marketplace norms and internal job values with pay ranges.

Salary ranges will be reviewed and updated as necessary based on marketplace survey data, internal relationships, and financial conditions.

B. Basic Plan Elements Structure
The compensation plan includes separate salary ranges for Department Head, Confidential/Management, Police Officer Trainees, and temporary/part-time unrepresented employees. Each salary range, which represents the range of what the Employer is willing to pay for the performance of a set of duties and responsibilities, is typically a 25% spread for non-exempt classifications, and a 35% spread for exempt classifications, from the minimum to the maximum rate. All unrepresented employees covered by this Compensation Plan will be paid a salary within the range, as determined by performance.

C. Cost of Living Adjustments for Department Head, Confidential/Management and Police Officer Trainee Classifications
Effective September 20, 2026 all unrepresented Department Head (except Police Chief), Confidential/Management and Police Officer Trainee classifications shall receive a salary increase of three percent (3%).

In addition to the salary increase, the City will provide a one-time lump sum payment Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
2 equivalent to the value of a three percent (3%) salary increase (including all premium pays) for the period of July 12, 2026, through the implementation of the three percent (3%) salary increase referenced above.

Effective the first full pay period in July 2027 all unrepresented Department Head, Confidential/Management and Police Officer Trainee classifications shall receive salary increase of three percent (3%).

For Police Chief
Effective the first full pay period following City Council approval the Police Chief shall receive a salary increase of three percent (3%).

In addition to the salary increase, the City will provide a one-time lump sum payment equivalent to the value of a three percent (3%) salary increase (including all premium pays) for the period of July 12, 2026, through the implementation of the three percent (3%) salary increase referenced above.

Market Adjustment
Effective the first full pay period following City Council approval the Police Chief shall receive a market adjustment increase of one percent (1%),
Effective the first full pay period in July 2027, the Police Chief shall receive salary increase of three percent (3%).

Effective the first full pay period in July 2028, the Police Chief shall receive salary increase of three percent (3%).

Provides a salary increase of three percent (3%) effective first full pay period in July 2028.

D. Cost of Living Adjustments for Temporary/Part-time classifications Effective July 1, 2026, the salary ranges for unrepresented temporary/part-time classifications shall be increased by two and two-tenths percent (2.2%) per the Minimum Wage Ordinance.

SECTION III. BENEFITS
A. Group Health and Welfare Benefits (except for Temporary/Part-Time)

1. Medical Benefit
The Employer shall continue to contract with the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) for the purpose of providing medical benefits for eligible active employees, eligible retired employees and eligible survivors of retired employees.

The Employer shall provide a contribution to the flexible benefits plan (Section 125 Cafeteria Plan) for each full-time active employee in regular or probationary status Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
3 enrolled in one of the CalPERS medical insurance plans offered by the Employer in accordance with Government Code Section 22892.

Effective the first full pay period following Council approval, the Employer will pay 90% of the selected plan premium, which includes the minimum contribution amount required by Government Code Section 22892. Contributions provided under this Section are required only to the extent mandated by Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA).

Effective the first full pay period following Council approval, the employee will pay 10% of the selected plan premium which shall be withheld from the employee's salary by the Employer on a pretax basis.

2. Medical In-Lieu/Alternate Benefit
Employees shall be allowed an opportunity to select certain options as alternatives to those benefits listed in Section III of this Memorandum of Understanding under the following terms. Eligibility for receipt of alternative benefits is restricted to those employees for whom no City contribution is made towards premiums for group medical insurance because the employees have opted out and have coverage from a source other than the City. In order to receive the medical in-lieu/alternate benefit, employees must meet all the requirements of an Eligible Opt-Out Arrangement.

The requirements that must be satisfied for the Eligible Opt-Out Arrangement are as follows:
(a) The Participant must have minimum essential coverage ("MEC") through another source (other than coverage in the individual market and other than individual coverage through Covered California);
(b) The Participant and all individuals in the Participant’s expected tax family have (or will have) the required minimum essential coverage. A Participant’s expected tax family includes all individuals for whom the Participant reasonably expects to claim a personal exemption deduction for the taxable year(s) that cover the Participant's plan year to which the opt-out arrangement applies; (c) The Participant must provide reasonable evidence of the MEC for the applicable period. Reasonable evidence may include an attestation by the Participant; (d) The Participant must provide the evidence/attestation every Plan Year; (e) The Participant must provide the evidence/attestation no earlier than a reasonable time before coverage starts (e.g. open enrollment). The evidence/attestation may also be provided within a reasonable time after the Plan Year starts; and
(f) The medical in-lieu/alternate benefit cannot be made (and the City must not in fact make payment) if the City knows or has reason to know that the Participant or tax family member does not have the alternative coverage.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
4 The City shall contribute ninety percent (90%) of the Kaiser - Region 1, single party premium per month for alternate benefits for eligible full-time employees who select and are eligible for the medical-in-lieu/alternate benefits.

The medical-in-lieu/alternate benefit is provided to the employee as a cash payment that supplements to the employee's monthly compensation. State and Federal taxes will be withheld on any monies applied to this option.

3. Dental Benefit
The Employer shall purchase and pay the full cost of coverage for employee and eligible dependent up to the family level. The Employer reserves the right to provide dental care benefits under a plan or through a carrier of its choice. Alternate coverage may be provided through a consortium of public agencies or private employers which may be formed for the purpose of providing dental care benefits for employees; or through a program of self-insurance.

4. Vision Benefit
The Employer shall pay the full cost of coverage for employee and eligible dependent up to the family level under the Vision Service Plan (VSP). The Employer reserves the right to provide vision care benefits under a plan or through a carrier of its choice. Alternate coverage may be provided through a consortium of public agencies or private employers which may be formed for the purpose of providing vision care benefits for employees; or through a program of selfinsurance.

5. Reservation of Rights
The Employer reserves the right to provide medical, dental or vision care benefits under a program other than that offered through the CalPERS or other existing benefit arrangements at any time during the term of this Plan. Alternate coverage may be provided through a consortium of public agencies or private Employers which may be formed for the purpose of providing medical, dental and vision care benefits for employees; or through a program of self-insurance.

If, at any time, the Employer reaches an agreement with the recognized employee organizations for the City’s miscellaneous represented employees, whereby premium caps are set at a rate higher than those listed above, the Employer agrees to revisit the medical plan premium share arrangement for unrepresented employees provided for in this Compensation and Benefits Plan document.

6. Health Care Legislation
In the event that either the State of California or the federal government produces legislation which requires a change in the benefits provided under this Plan, or imposes an employee or an Employer contribution requirement toward the cost of such benefits, Employer shall have the right to adjust its contributions so that its total contribution is no greater than is required under this Plan and shall have a duty to provide any benefits lost through such legislation through a supplemental health Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
5 plan. In the event that the cost of such additional benefits exceeds the total Employer contribution required by this Plan, employees will be informed of alternative plan design which conforms with the legislation and any necessary adjustments in contribution levels for both Employer and the employees covered hereunder.

7. Employee Assistance Program
Employees are eligible to participate in a free, confidential counseling and referral service designed to help them or members of their immediate household resolve personal problems that may be interfering with work and home life. The plan provides a set number of visits per year, at no cost to the employee or eligible family members.

8. Life Insurance
The Employer shall pay the entire cost of providing each regular and probationary full-time employee with group term life insurance equal to the individual's annual base salary (rounded to the next highest $1,000). This policy will include Accidental Death & Dismemberment coverage, and the right of conversion at the time of termination from employment to a form of permanent coverage without medical restrictions, to the extent allowable by the insurance carrier and the law.

The payment for such converted coverage shall be the sole responsibility of the individual electing such coverage.

For Permanent Part-Time employees, the Employer shall provide group term life insurance in an amount equivalent to the employee’s annualized salary, rounded to the nearest $1,000.

Miscellaneous Benefits (for Department Head and Confidential/Management Classifications only)

1. Flexible Spending (FSA) and Dependent Care (DCAP) Accounts Employer agrees to allow employees to designate a specific amount of salary, consistent with applicable public law, to be redirected each month to pay for Health Care and Dependent care costs on a pre-tax basis. The Employer will reimburse such employee on a monthly basis for health care and dependent care from such redirected funds, upon presentation to the designated third-party administrator of a claim and receipt for services rendered. Any unused funds will be administered in accordance with applicable Federal law. Federal law limits the circumstances under which an employee may elect benefits and change an election under the Flexible Benefits Plan.

2. Participation in the California Government Voluntary Employee Benefits Association (CALGOVEBA)
All employees in Department Head, and Confidential/Management classifications will participate in the CalGOVEBA ("VEBA") 501(C)9 Trust pursuant to the agreement attached as Exhibit B and may be amended from time to time pursuant Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
6 to the requirements of such agreement. Participation will be subject to and governed by all IRS requirements applicable to the VEBA and employees will be subject to the provisions of such agreement as may be revised.

3. Retired Employees Health Benefits
The Employer shall contribute the minimum employer health premium contribution required under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA) toward CalPERS medical insurance premium. Employees hired prior to July 1, 2002, or employees with eleven (11) or more years of continuous service, are eligible for the following retiree health benefits:

Medical Dental Vision
Retiree $162.00 $20.00 $5.00
Retiree + One Dependent $286.00 $35.00 $8.68
Retiree + Two or more Dependents $363.00 $46.00 $8.68
The medical benefit includes PEMHCA. The Employer shall contribute the greater of the medical benefit amount shown above or the applicable PEMHCA minimum contribution. The Employer's medical contribution shall be paid directly to CalPERS.

The Employer's dental and vision contributions shall be applied toward the applicable monthly premiums. The retiree shall be responsible for paying any remaining premium amount directly to the Employer.

To be eligible for the Employer's retiree health benefits described in this section, an employee must be currently enrolled in an Employer-sponsored medical (CalPERS), dental, and/or vision plan at the time of retirement. An employee who is not enrolled in an applicable plan upon retirement shall not be eligible to receive the Employer's corresponding medical, dental, or vision contribution for that plan at a later date, except as otherwise required by law.

4. Long Term Disability Insurance
The Employer shall provide, at no cost to full-time active regular employees, longterm disability (LTD) insurance with a benefit of 60% of the employee’s monthly salary, up to a benefit cap of $10,000 per month, less any other income.

5. Technology Stipend
An eligible employee who is required by the Employer to use a mobile communications device (e.g. cellular phone) in the course of their regular duties and who is not provided with such a device by the City for such use may apply for and prospectively be paid a payment of forty dollars ($40) per month to partially offset the employee’s cost of providing and using their personal device for City business. The payments will commence prospectively not later than the first of the month following their supervisor’s receipt of the employee’s application. To qualify for the payment, the employee must sign and submit a Cellular Phone Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
7 Authorization Form to their supervisor for processing and an acknowledgement that the employee has an affirmative duty to provide the employer, at the employer’s request, with all records on the device pertaining to City business. City rules concerning conduct related to the use of communications devices that apply to the use of City-owned communications devices will apply equally to the use of the employee’s personal device for City business. The City Manager or their designee will review approved applications not less than annually for the purpose of identifying employees that no longer qualify for a monthly stipend and ensuring that such stipends are terminated.

6. 457 Deferred Compensation Contribution
Department Head and Confidential/Management classifications shall have deposited into their 457 Deferred Compensation account a flat amount of twentyfive dollars ($25) in the first full pay period following each full month of employment. To be eligible for the City contribution, the employee must be enrolled in the Employer City 457 Deferred Compensation Plan on the date of payment and must have been in a paid status for all of the month prior to the date of payment.

7. Uniform Allowance (For Police Chief only)
The City will provide the Police Chief an initial uniform allowance of one thousand four hundred dollars ($1,400) for the purchase of articles required by the City for the affected employee's uniform. Thereafter, the annual allowance will be paid on a biweekly basis in the amount of fifty-three dollars and eighty-five cents ($53.85).

If the employee separates from City Service, for whatever reason (except death), during the year for which the annual uniform allowance has been paid, such payment shall be adjusted on a prorated basis in relationship to the period of service for that year.

8. Education Incentive (For Police Chief only)
Effective the first full pay period following City Council approval, the City will provide a 2% incentive for employees with a master’s degree.

9. Chiropractic Care (For Police Chief only)
The City shall maintain a self-insured chiropractic benefit of two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) for verified employee chiropractic services.

B. Miscellaneous Benefits (for Department Head Classifications only)

1. Automobile Allowance and/or Uncompensated Expense
Department Head classifications whose duties require the regular use of their personal vehicle, may be authorized a maximum payment of $275 per month.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
8 2. Retirement
The Employer will contract with the California Public Employee Retirement System (“CalPERS”) for the “2% at 60” benefit formula, with a three (3) highest years compensation base for pension calculation, for eligible employees who are employed in classifications deemed eligible by CalPERS to participate in the CalPERS “miscellaneous” pension benefit system.

Unrepresented employees participating in the CalPERS miscellaneous pension benefit system will pay seven percent (7%) of their CalPERSable wages toward the CalPERS employee contribution.

Employee contributions made directly toward the CalPERS employee contribution for services rendered shall be made on a pre-tax basis to the extent permitted under Internal Revenue Code Section 414(h). The Employer will not treat employer contributions toward the CalPERS employee contribution as compensation subject to income tax withholding unless required to do so by applicable local, state or federal law. Each employee shall be solely and personally responsible for any Federal, State or local tax liability of the employee that may arise out of the implementation of this section or any penalty that may be imposed therefore.

Effective January 1, 2013, newly hired employees that are considered “new members” in accordance with the Public Employee Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) will be enrolled under the CalPERS Miscellaneous Employee 2% @ 62 retirement formula plan (average of highest three (3) years compensation earnable and Level III Survivor Benefits plan), in accordance with applicable law and PEPRA.

Employees enrolled in the 2% @ 62 shall contribute to the CalPERS each pay period one half the normal cost which is currently eight and a quarter (8.25%) of “PERSable” compensation toward the CalPERS employee contribution rate.

Unrepresented employees hired on or after January 1, 2012, into a classification deemed eligible by CalPERS eligible for CalPERS "safety" pension benefit plan participation shall participate in the Public Employee Retirement System under the "3% at 55" formula, with a highest average annual compensation earnable for a 12- or 36-consecutive month employment period for pension calculation.

Unrepresented employees participating in the CalPERS safety pension benefit system will pay nine percent (9%) plus the five percent (5%) employee pick up for a total of fourteen percent (14%) of their pensionable compensation toward the CalPERS employee contribution, in accordance with the CalPERS contract, effective July 1, 2017. Police Managers shall make the same level of contributions as Police Officers enrolled in the CalPERS "safety" benefit plan.

Effective January 1, 2013, newly hired employees that are considered "new members" in accordance with the Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) will be enrolled under the CalPERS Safety Employee 2.7%@ 57 retirement formula plan (average annual pensionable compensation for a 36-consecutive month period and Level III Survivor Benefits plan), in accordance with applicable law and PEPRA. Employees enrolled in the 2.7% @ 57 shall contribute to the CalPERS each pay period in accordance with the PEPRA provisions. Government Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
9 Code Section 7522.10 of the PEPRA law provides the authority for the earnings limit for all PEPRA members.

3. Severance
Employees in “at-will” classifications, as defined in the Personnel Rules and Relations for the Employer, are eligible for severance pay, equivalent to one (1) week pay for every year of service, up to a maximum of eight (8) weeks of pay, when released from employment for non-disciplinary reasons.

Severance pay shall be calculated on the basis of employee's regular straight time (hourly equivalent) rate at the time of separation, shall be paid in a lump sum, and shall not be counted as time worked for the purpose of qualifying for employment benefits.

4. Health and Wellness
Eligible employees may participate in city-sponsored activities at the Emeryville Center for Community Life (ECCL) at the posted Emeryville City resident rate as established, revised, and implemented from time to time at the discretion of the Employer.

SECTION IV. PAID TIME OFF
A. Vacation (except for Temporary/Part-Time)
An employee shall accrue vacation leave from the date of the employee's regular appointment by the Employer, each month at the rates enumerated below. Except that the City Manager has sole authorization to credit new employees with additional week(s) per year for relevant service with a prior employer. Such accrual and credit may not exceed two (2) times the annual rate of accrual. For the purpose of determining the amount of vacation entitlement, an employment year is defined as the period of one (1) year from the anniversary date of such appointment by the Employer.

Employees hired prior to July 1, 1998:
0 to 9 years: Fifteen (15) days per year
10 to 20 years: Twenty (20) days per year
21+ years: Twenty-five (25) days per year
Employees hired after July 1, 1998:
0 to 4 years: Ten (10) days per year
5 to 9 years: Fifteen (15) days per year
10 to 20 years: Twenty (20) days per year
20+ years: Twenty-five (25) days per year
Regular Part-Time Employees
Regular part-time employees appointed to at least a 50% time status position, shall be Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
10 eligible to accrue prorated vacation leave hours based on the budgeted full-time equivalent status of the position held. For example, an employee in a budgeted 75% full-time equivalent position would be eligible to accrue vacation leave at 75% of a full-time employee’s accrual level with the same years of service.

B. Sick Leave (Except for Temporary/Part-Time)
Unrepresented employees (regular and probationary) shall accrue prorated sick leave at equivalent to the budgeted full-time equivalent status of the position held. For example, an employee in a budgeted 75% full-time equivalent position would be eligible to accrue sick leave at 75% of a full-time employee with the same years of service.

Payment for Unused Leave
Employees hired before January 1, 2014, who voluntarily resign or retire from the City and provide at least two (2) weeks' notice of intent shall have the option of having their unused sick leave balance paid out. Payment of unused sick leave is limited to a maximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours for employees assigned to a 40-hour workweek or eight hundred forty (840) hours for employees assigned to a 35-hour workweek.

The payment shall be calculated by multiplying the employee's eligible unused sick leave hours by 60% of the employee's hourly base rate of pay at the time of separation. The City will pay the employee the amount calculated less the applicable CalGOVEBA contributions. Refer to the CAMP CalGOVEBA Agreement.

Employees hired on or after January 1, 2014, who have completed at least ten (10) years of continuous service and voluntarily resign or retire from the City and provide at least two (2) weeks' notice of intent shall have the option of having their unused sick leave balance paid out. Payment of unused sick leave is limited to a maximum of nine hundred sixty (960) hours for employees assigned to a 40-hour workweek or eight hundred forty (840) hours for employees assigned to a 35-hour workweek.

The payment shall be calculated by multiplying the employee's eligible unused sick leave hours by 30% of the employee's hourly base rate of pay at the time of separation. The City will pay the employee the amount calculated less the applicable CalGOVEBA contributions. Refer to the CAMP CalGOVEBA Agreement.

Any unused sick leave balance above the 960 maximum hours will be reported to CalPERS for service credit consideration.

Employees who do not have a CalGOVEBA terminal leave deferral in their CalGOVEBA agreement and choose to opt out of payment for unused sick leave will have their unused sick leave hours balance reported to CalPERS for service credit consideration. Employees who separate from employment as a result of disciplinary action shall not be deemed to have separated in good standing and shall not be eligible for payment of unused sick leave under this section.

C. Sick Leave Temporary/Part-time Classifications only) Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
11 The Employer will provide sick leave in accordance with the California Paid Sick Leave requirements.

1. Sick Leave for Immediate Family Care
a. Definition of Immediate Family. Immediate family is defined as employee's spouse,/ -domestic partner, children, (biological, adopted, foster, step, legal wards, or children of domestic partner),siblings (step, half), grandparents, grandchildren, parents (parents in-law, step-parents),and up to one (1) designated (chosen) person per 12-month period.
b. Entitlement. An employee may use accrued sick leave in accordance with state requirements and guidelines. At the Employer's request, the employee will provide satisfactory evidence of the facts justifying such absence.

D. Bereavement Leave (Except Temporary/Part-Time)
In the event of a death in the immediate family, employees may be granted a maximum of five (5) workdays (no more than 35 or 40 hours based on designated work schedule) for paid bereavement leave for each such incident relating to matters dealing with the death of the employee's immediate family.

For the purposes of this section the ·immediate family shall include the employee's spouse/domestic partner, children (biological, adopted, foster, step, legal wards, or children of domestic partner), siblings (step, half), grandparents, grandchildren, parents (parents inlaw, step-parents), and up to one (1) designated (chosen) person per 12-month period.

At the request of the City, the employee shall furnish a death certificate and proof of relationship.

Employees must have worked for the employer for at least 30 days prior to the leave. Leave must be completed within three months after the death for whom the leave is being taken.

This provision does not apply if the death occurs while the employee is on unpaid leave of absence or layoff.

E. Administrative Leave (For Department Head and Confidential/Management Employees only)
At the discretion of the City Manager, unrepresented exempt employees shall be granted ten (10) days of Administrative Leave. Procedures governing the granting and use of Administrative Leave are provided in the City’s Administrative Instruction Manual or the Personnel Rules.

An employee may elect in advance to cash out up to ten (10) days of unused administrative leave at their base rate of pay at time of payment each fiscal year. The Employer may establish and modify the timeframe and deadline for advance election of administrative leave cash out to ensure that such leave is not subject to immediate taxation as income under state or federal law at the time it is credited to the employee.

Eligible employees shall have administrative leave balances automatically cashed out at the end of the fiscal year. In no event will administrative leave be carried forward to the Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
12 next fiscal year.

Eligible employees may use accrued Administrative Leave with advance scheduling approval of their respective supervisor. Employees who separate from employment with the City shall be paid any unused administrative leave up to ten (10) days, upon separation.

F. Holidays
The following holidays shall be observed by the Employer. The Employer’s offices will be closed on these days except as otherwise provided by the department head.

1. New Years’ Day (January 1)

2. Martin Luther King, Jr. Birthday (3rd Monday in January)

3. Presidents’ Day (3rd Monday in February)

4. Memorial Day (last Monday in May)

5. Juneteenth (June 19)

6. Independence Day (July 4)

7. Labor Day (1st Monday in September)

8. Indigenous Peoples’ Day (2nd Monday in October)

9. Veterans’ Day (November 11)

10. Thanksgiving Day (4th Thursday in November)

11. Day after Thanksgiving

12. Christmas Day (December 25)
The Employer’s Administrative Instruction 1114 shall govern the terms and manner of holiday observance and compensation.

Eligible employees shall be granted three (3) floating holidays each fiscal year on the first day of the first pay period beginning on or after July 1 of the respective year.

Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
12 Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
13 APPENDIX A (Schedule 1)

BIWEEKLY WAGE SCHEDULE
Effective September 20, 2026
Job Code Job Classification Step A Top Step
1140 Administrative Services Director 7,623.00 10,291.40 1135 Assistant City Manager 8,141.70 10,990.70
1740 City Clerk 6,140.40 8,289.40
1115 Community Development Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1545 Community Services Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1055 Finance Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1091 Human Resources Analyst 4,183.90 5,139.40
1095 Human Resources Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1090 Human Resources Manager 6,129.90 8,521.80
1154 Information Technology Director 7,623.00 10,291.40 1060 *Police Chief 9,764.00 12,204.80
1250 Police Officer Trainee 3,256.80 3,418.40
1080 Public Works Director 7,623.00 10,291.40
1092 Senior Human Resources Analyst 4,636.10 6,258.00
*Pending Council Approval for Increase
Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
13 Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
14 APPENDIX A (Schedule 2)

BIWEEKLY WAGE SCHEDULE
Biweekly Salaries effective first full pay period in July 2027 Job Code Job Classification Step A Top Step
1140 Administrative Services Director 7,851.20 10,600.10 1135 Assistant City Manager 8,386.00 11,320.40
1740 City Clerk 6,324.50 8,537.90
1115 Community Development Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1545 Community Services Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1055 Finance Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1091 Human Resources Analyst 4,309.20 5,293.40
1095 Human Resources Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1090 Human Resources Manager 6,314.00 8,777.30
1154 Information Technology Director 7,851.20 10,600.10 1060 *Police Chief 10,056.80 12,571.20
1250 Police Officer Trainee 3,354.40 3,520.80
1080 Public Works Director 7,851.20 10,600.10
1092 Senior Human Resources Analyst 4,774.70 6,445.60
*Pending Council Approval for Increase
Biweekly Salary effective first full pay period in July 2028 Job Code Job Classification Step A Top Step
1060 Police Chief 10,358.40 12,948.00

APPENDIX B
Unrepresented Compensation and Benefit Plan
Amended September 2026
15 HOURLY WAGE SCHEDULE
Salaries effective first full pay period in July 2026
Job Code Job Classification Step A Range Top Step
1730 Intern 20.34 -41.31
1560 Pool Manager 20.34 -39.44
1795 Public Service Employee 20.34 -141.22
1590 Recreation Leader 20.34 -30.59
City of Emeryville

C A L I F O R N I A

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: October 6, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Chadrick Smalley, Community Development Director SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE

AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A PROHOUSING DESIGNATION

PROGRAM APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD)

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council review and provide input on this staff report and on the attached Prohousing Designation Program score sheet and approve the attached resolution authorizing submittal of the application for Prohousing Designation to the State of California.

BACKGROUND
The Prohousing Designation Program (PDP) is a State of California program administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), established by the 2019-2020 Budget Act and Assembly Bill 101. The PDP recognizes jurisdictions that adopt policies and practices that go beyond the minimum requirements of state law to accelerate housing production and remove barriers to housing development.

Jurisdictions that receive Prohousing Designation become eligible for incentives in the form of additional points, or other scoring preference, in HCD's competitive housing, community development, and infrastructure funding programs. Designated jurisdictions are also eligible to apply for funding through the Prohousing Incentive Program (PIP).

Designation is valid for three years, after which a jurisdiction must reapply.

In 2023, the City of Emeryville applied for and received Prohousing Designation status, which resulted in Emeryville receiving a $575,000 PIP Grant, utilized to support accessibility and rental housing capital improvements. The City's current Prohousing designation will expire on January 1, 2027. To pursue this designation again, the City has prepared a draft Prohousing Designation application documenting existing and proposed housing policies. Consistent with HCD's application requirements, the City released the draft application for a public comment period prior to seeking City Council authorization to submit the final application to HCD. The public comment period is open through October 6, 2026.

Prohousing Designation Application
City Council Meeting | October 6, 2026