Law and Legislation Committee
September 17, 2024

City of Sacramento
Law and Legislation Committee Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2024-01257 9/17/2024 Discussion Item 4.

Tenant Protection Program Update
File ID: 2024-01257
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Review and comment
Contact: Peter Lemos, Code and Housing Enforcement Chief, (916) 808-8183, [email protected]; Greg Sandlund, Planning Director, (916) 808-8931, [email protected]; Community Development Department Presenter: Peter Lemos, Code and Housing Enforcement Chief, (916) 808-8183, [email protected], Community Development Department Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Tenant Protection Program Background
3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail:

Tenant Protection and Relief Act
On August 13, 2019, the City Council adopted the addition of Chapter 5.156, the Tenant Protection and Relief Act. The Tenant Protection Program (Program) was established to assist residential tenants with increasing rental rates by establishing limits on annual rent increases and for long term tenants to provide protection from unwarranted lease termination.

While the program went into effect September 2019, due to statewide eviction moratoriums that were put in place because of COVID, the program did not initiate until the moratoriums expired on September 30, 2020 (although certain aspects of the moratoriums were extended through June 30, 2021).

The City to collects data to review the effectiveness of the Program and is considering changes that would strengthen the effectiveness of the Ordinance. This data, in addition to interviews with interest groups and surveys (see Attachments 3 and 4), is being used to consider amendments to the

File ID: 2024-01257 9/17/2024 Discussion Item 4.
groups and surveys (see Attachments 3 and 4), is being used to consider amendments to the Ordinance.

As a first step, staff will be bringing to this committee amendments to extend the sunset date of the ordinance to December 31, 2025, to provide another year of programmatic data for a review of the effectiveness of the ordinance and to propose possible amendments.

Policy Considerations: The following Housing Element policies and programs support staff’s recommendation to extend the Ordinance by one year and review the Ordinance with additional data to be gathered at a future date:
· H-5.2 Strengthen Tenant Protections. The City shall explore options to strengthen eviction prevention, limits on annual rent increases, and tenant relocation measures. · Program H25. Sacramento Tenant Protection Act. The City shall conduct outreach to raise awareness by tenants and landlords of the requirements and rights afforded to them under the Sacramento Tenant Protection Act (Sacramento City Code Chapter 5.156). The City shall collect data to review the effectiveness of the current ordinance and consider changes that would strengthen the effectiveness of the current ordinance.

Economic Impacts: Eviction protections and rental increase limits can provide economic stability for our most vulnerable renter populations.

Environmental Considerations: This report is an administrative activity that does not result in a direct or indirect physical change to the environment. Therefore, this action is exempt from environmental review under CEQA per the CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5).

Sustainability: There are no sustainability considerations applicable to amending Sacramento City Code 5.156 related to tenant protection.

Commission/Committee Action: Review and comment.

Rationale for Recommendation: Not applicable; this item is for review and comment Financial Considerations: Not applicable.

Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.

Attachment 2-Tenant Protection Program Background

On August 13, 2019, the City Council adopted the Tenant Protection and Relief Act which protects renters from excessive rent increases and unjustified evictions and established the Tenant Protection Program (TPP).In consideration of the current sunset date of December 31, 2024 noted in the Ordinance the following is a summary of TPP:

Tenant Protection Program
• Program applies to most apartments and duplexes built before February 1, 1995. Mobile home rentals and single occupancy rooms in hotels rented for longer than 30 days are included. Single- family dwellings and rental units in condominiums and stock cooperatives are excluded. • There are more than 42,000 rental units situated on over 8,000 parcels within the city subject to the ordinance.

Rental Rate Restrictions
• Annual rental rate increases cannot exceed 5% plus the change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) determined annually on April 1. The maximum rent increase cannot exceed 10%. • The current maximum rate increase is 8.8% which became effective July 1, 2024. • The rental rate cannot increase more frequently than once every 12 months. • After a rental unit has been vacated, a landlord may establish the base rent for a new tenant under a new rental housing agreement. Any increase in rent for the new tenant must comply with the ordinance.
• A landlord can submit a petition to the city to request a “Fair Rate of Return” hearing for approval to increase rent above the maximum. The landlord must provide documentation to support the request and the hearing examiner’s decision is final. • Tenants can submit a complaint to the city if they believe a landlord has failed to comply with the ordinance related to rent increases. Tenant complaints have been addressed by educating the landlord as to the maximum increase under the ordinance.

Tenant Eviction Protections
• Once a tenant has resided in a rental unit for more than 12 months, the landlord cannot terminate the rental agreement and require the tenant to move out without a “just cause” reason.
• The permitted reasons for evicting a tenant include failure to pay rent; breach of the rental housing agreement; criminal or nuisance activity; failure to give access; necessary and substantial repairs requiring temporary vacancy; owner move-in; or withdrawal of the rental unit from the rental market.
• Tenants can submit a petition requesting a hearing if they believe a landlord terminated a rental agreement without just cause.

Tenant Protection Program Implementation Timeline
The Business Compliance unit of the Community Development Department administers and enforces the Tenant Protection Program. Unfortunately, complete implementation of the program was delayed due to COVID-19 and implementation of the eviction moratorium ordinances. The following is the program timeline:
2019
Attachment 2-Tenant Protection Program Background

• City Council adopted Tenant Protection and Relief Act. • City created the Tenant Protection Program website which provides information for landlords and tenants including links for the ordinance and FAQs. • City Council adopted Tenant Protection Program operating and revenue budget including 3.0 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees (1.0 Program Specialist and 2.0 Customer Service Specialist).
2020
• Ordinance amended to reduce the annual rent adjustment from 6% to 5% to be consistent with state Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB 1482).
•City Council approved an agreement with Sacramento Self Help Housing to provide intake and outreach assistance.
• Program Specialist and two Customer Service Specialists hired to manage and support TPP . • City Council adopted an emergency ordinance to establish a temporary moratorium on evicting residential tenants unable to pay rent due to a loss of income caused COVID-19. • City Council amended the ordinance establishing a temporary moratorium on evicting tenants unable to pay rent due to a loss of income caused by COVID-19 to include commercial tenants. • City Council amended the emergency ordinance to limit the temporary moratorium on evicting commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19 to only 1st floor retail tenants. • City’s eviction moratorium ordinance preventing eviction due to non-payment of rent for residential tenants ends.
• TPP staff resumed program development and implementation including, but not limited to, finalizing administrative policies and procedures (i.e. pre-eviction and fair rate of return hearing processes); finalizing TPP rental housing registry forms and process; and preparing program billing and invoicing process.
2021
• Launch TPP communication campaign including initial outreach to landlords informing them on upcoming registration and billing notices and to tenants advising them of their rights and how to initiate a complaint or concern.
• First rounds of registration and invoicing sent out, covering over 8,100 parcels which include more than 42,000 rental units.
• Fielded 599 telephone calls and 729 emails from tenants. • Fielded 863 telephone calls and 2,398 emails from landlords. 2022
• Fielded 735 telephone calls and 525 emails from tenants. • Fielded 1,263 telephone calls and 1,580 emails from landlords. 2023
• Fielded 971 telephone calls and 731 emails from tenants.

Attachment 2-Tenant Protection Program Background

• Fielded 1,556 telephone calls and 1,717 emails from landlords. • Tenant Petition and Landlord Fair Rate of Return Petitions heard before Hearing Examiners. • Sacramento Self Help closed after filing bankruptcy, alleviating the intake and outreach assistance.
2024
• Fielded 847 telephone calls and 344 emails from tenants. • Fielded 1,403 telephone calls and 1,400 emails from landlords. • TPP has been in review of the ordinance, reaching out to stakeholders and determining program effectiveness to recommend next steps.

Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 1 Outreach was conducted to interested stakeholders in June 2024 regarding the effectiveness of the City’s current Tenant Protection Program (Sacramento City Code Chapter 5.156). This outreach was conducted to meet the intent of Housing Element Implementation Program H25. Sacramento Tenant Protection Act. The feedback received during those meetings is summarized below.

Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting 1
Meeting Minutes
Held June 10, 2024 @ 3pm via Zoom
City Staff Attendees: Greta Soos, Matt Hertel, Vickie Riggins Medina, Greg Sandlund, Peter Lemos, Stacey Chatman
Attendee Affiliation
Matt McDonald California Apartment Association
Kellie Swayne California Association of Realtors
Barb Lebrecht California Association of Realtors
Jeff Slodowitz J&R Property Management
Marisa Kolokotronis SKK Developments
Jennifer Pharr FPI Management
John Vignocchi Urban Capital
Liz William Sacramento Metro Chamber
Alejandro White Sacramento Delta Property Management
Heather Smith FPI Management
Cecilia Varela FPI Management
Rosa Chong FPI Management
Sotoris Kolokotronis SKK Developments
Erin Teague Sacramento Association of Realtors
Jordan Carlson Anthem Properties Group
Marcos Mogyoros Anthem Properties Group

(Staff began the meeting by providing an overview of the Tenant Protection Program, its applicability and purpose, and recent statistics.)
Discussion Question 1
What improvements could be made to how the current ordinance is being implemented? What have your/your client/constituents experiences been?  Jeff: Would be helpful for Resident Rights to be updated and be hosted on the City’s website
o CAA confirmed they just updated this and would send to City staff  Erin: Having available resources on the website along with a hotline for people would be helpful
Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 2 o City staff confirmed that the Renter’s Helpline is still available along with 211
 The City should enforce AB 1482, which it is given authority to do via SB 567 o City staff responded that the TPP is structured and funded is not such that it enforces State Law. Items like relocation payments cannot be enforced by the City, the City takes on more of the administrative process to help apply state law (petition hearings, rate evaluation, etc) – but not true enforcement of all that is covered under state law.
o Matt M. thanked the clarification and stated that helped but did want to emphasize – it is not a matter of more legislation – laws are already in place.

 Matt M: Property owners should be solicited for a survey, not just tenants. Matt M. offered to assist with getting a survey to Property Owners so that that they can weight in.
o City staff stated that the City is open to discussing an additional survey for owners.
 Matt M: asked how many units are currently active in the TPP? o City staff responded, 42,000 units

Discussion Question 2
If Council were to direct changes to the program, what would your top priorities be for potential changes?
 Jeff: TPP should fall completely in line with AB1482 to make it easier for tenants and owners to follow the law. TPP & 1482 have very few differences but still, less confusion leads to less mistakes.
o Erin: Respectfully disagree, believe that for local mom and pop owners TPP is beneficial as is for just cause evictions – it has been for the good of the whole.
o Jeff: Understands but has to hire a lawyer for every change that occurs. o Erin: While it can be very confusing when jurisdictions have differences this particular one is working.
 Kellie: Why are changes even being proposed? The program is doing what it was designed to. Rents are also coming down – so why change it? No need to spend money and time on something that is working as intended. As Matt M. stated there is also no data from landlords which skews the data – the purpose of the TPP is for both landlords and tenants (allow landlords fair rate of return) – so their input should be gathered.
 Erin T: If the program changes it would be a negative single to housing investment/construction. When this was created, as Kellie said, it was negotiated Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 3 fairly and agreed upon by all parties. The program is working, we just need to continue the momentum and avoid any major changes.
 Matt M: Out of the 42,000 units for only 209 cases. That means that generally the rental industry is acting responsibly and that to make any major changes would be a risk of causing damage to the rental market – not worth it.  Peter added that the reason why the cases and hearings are so low is because staff does an outstanding job in educating and mitigating.
 Jeff: Just focus on community awareness and remove unnecessary overlays/differences with AB 1482. Anything additional/new will be passed along as costs to the tenants.
 Peter: Most calls received are from owners wanting clarification and answers, so it would be nice to hear from your clients as to if there is anything that needs to be clarified.
o Matt M: That just makes the case for us to get owner data – let’s check to see how they feel about the program.
 Heather S: If our clients have input/questions to provide on the survey, can I email that in?
o Greta stated yes.

Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 4 Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting 2
Meeting Minutes
Held June 17, 2024 @ 5:30pm via Zoom
City Staff Attendees: Greta Soos, Matt Hertel, Vickie Riggins Medina, Peter Lemos, Phillip Norton, Stacey Chatman
Attendee Affiliation
Arturo J Arroyo Jr Sacramento Environmental Justice Coalition Jennifer Holden Sacramento Environmental Justice Coalition Erica Jaramillo Renter in Colonial Heights
Barry F Boyd Sacramento Environmental Justice Coalition Herman Barahona Sacramento Environmental Justice Coalition David Andre Unidentified
Eroz Burse Unidentified

(Staff began the meeting by providing an overview of the Tenant Protection Program, its applicability and purpose, and recent statistics.)

Discussion Question 1
What improvements could be made to how the current ordinance is being implemented? What have your/your client/constituents experiences been?  Herman: Northern CA Legal Services (which is currently experiencing overflow and can ’t get to all the cases presented) states that there are around 9,000 evictions processed per year in Sacramento County. This would seem to mean that TPP needs to do a better job and/or improve their marketing. The other thing that can be improved is the criteria that screens them out from applicability to TPP needs to be changed. The inclusion of subsidized housing would increase the usage of TPP.
 Jennifer: 40% of rentals in my area are all single family homes (SFH). SFH should also be covered under the program.
o City staff clarified that SFH are covered under State law (Costa-Hawkins) and not sure if there would be a mechanism to allow them to be cov ered under the City.
 Barry: Per Sacramento City Code, how many housing units can one person own? o Staff confirmed that there is no limitation.
o Barry stated that a few years ago the City then passed an Ordinance to limit ownership to 100 units per owner. Staff asked if he could please pass along Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 5 any information he might have on that as no staff are aware of that Ordinance.
 Erica put the following suggestions in the chat:

1. “Monthly or quarterly scheduled trainings on the TPP and especially the appeals process.

2. Improve transparency on the appeals process especially when the process changes.

3. Provide tenants with copies of any notices sent to owner/landlord.

4. It seems there is not much of a collaborative approach to working with code enforcement and that tenants have to deal with this entity entirely separately from TPP . Code enforcement does not provide copies of notices to tenants at all. Tenants deserve to know about the notices and what is being asked of the landlord or owner in terms of conditions and any corrections being requested.

5. Include single family homes in the ordinance and tax credit units.

6. Improve timeliness in responding to TPP complaints.”  Eroz put the following in the chat:
o “I do not think but, 100 percent know that Harassment definitely is an issue not only between domestic violence, but civil disputes need to be addressed in these matters. Also, I'm wondering if there is a way we can include the terms agreed between the landlord and the tenant and definitely what the limitations are for breaking these conditions for example how many times can a tenant break a lease term before being warned/ written up/ asked to leave. As well as how long it takes for a landlord to respond to other tenants breaking said conditions. I don't understand how there can be a whole lease and the landlord does not have to enforce terms that are just.”
 Herman: Are subsidized units exempted from the TPP by the city only? o Staff stated that subsidized units are exempted under AB1482. They also stated that those units are under another governmental agency, so it would be considered a conflict.
 Erica: There is a lot of confusion and a need for education for persons in subsidized units. People that have vouchers are being asked months later for money owed – they have nowhere to go since TPP does not handle subsidized housing. Does TPP have interagency relationships to warm transfer and at least help if they can’t handle?
o Staff stated that we do not have contracts with other agencies. While the goal is to be able to warm transfer and have those backdoor numbers to assist people, the agencies are all understaffed and they also feel it would not be fair and would put others at an advantage that would not be fair, but we are still working toward that goal.
o Erica responded that the City can still choose to include them. o Herman: I would strongly encourage the City to include subsidized units.

The elderly and disabled are mainly impacted with these types of units.

They cannot navigate the systems and are evicted because they have no Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 6 one to help. We had a volunteer attorney who states that there are agencies over these subsidized units that violate tenant rights.  Erica: I just want to reiterate that I know of tenants with vouchers who, months or in some cases a year or so later, will receive a notice that they owe money. I also know of cases where SHRA has not paid their rent for a couple of months , and they come after the tenant for the money. There must be a better w ay. I a lso understand that warm handoffs to other agencies may not be doable now but again there has to be a way . Council can mandate that those agencies cooperate , and they can also mandate something be done to regulate the funds and assist those folks with vouchers so they aren’t lost.

Discussion Question 2
If Council were to direct changes to the program, what would your top priorities be for potential changes?
 Erica: Sacramento Steps Forward classes on AB 1482, Leases, and Habitability Issues are referring tenants to the California Apartment Association (CAA). That is a membership organization and is not free. The training is not accessible. Why are tenants being referred to that training when it’s not free or accessible? o City staff stated that they are aware that CAA does prepare and provide resources for their members who are then to distribute them to tenants, but we aren’t aware if that does get done. The City has asked them for these resources as well so that we can post them on our site and ensure they are provided to tenants.
 Herman: Subsidized housing is key. Although there are successes in the current program, this type of service is needed for all.
 Erica: Is there a way to prioritize rental housing cases when there are issues with the unit?
o Peter: If a rental housing inspection program home has a violation they do get priority, just call 311 and they will create a dangerous buildings case. o Erica: For those with the bad conditions what is the threshold? o Peter: The rental housing inspection program is separate and if something is self-certified it may not be getting inspected on a regular basis so if issues arise it is best to call 311 to get a housing and dangerous buildings case open right away.
o Erica: There needs to be education f or tenants on the difference and what steps they can take when there are issues.
 Barry: If someone is in the Rental Housing Program (RHIP) and has a violation how soon are they removed from the program?
o Peter: For both TPP and RHIP units are never removed from the program, but for RHIP there is another component. There is the registration of the Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 7 property but then there is the inspection program to affirm the status of the property, so if a complaint is called in and it is found to be in violation it is handled immediately and then they are removed from self -certification for inspections but not removed from the program. Multi-Family housing is also now subject to a new State regulation where if it appears that violations may affect other units they can be investigated and cited, for example, a 66 unit complex out North has a roof issue so all 66 units are subject to the violation.

Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting 3
Meeting Minutes
Held June 19, 2024 @ 3:00pm via Zoom
City Staff Attendees: Greta Soos, Matt Hertel, Greg Sandlund, Vickie Riggins Medina, Stacey Chatman
Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 8 Attendee Affiliation
Sarah Ropelato Legal Services of Northern California
Cathy Creswell Sacramento Housing Alliance
Jorge A Iniquez Legal Services of Northern California
Katherine Eddy Legal Services of Northern California
Jovana Fajardo Alliance of Californians for Community
Empowerment

Jovana: We would like to ensure that the persons who interacted with the TPP program sent the survey.

Cathy: In agreement.

Greta: That is a good suggestion, and we will regroup internally to see what is possible.

Discussion Question 1
What improvements could be made to how the current ordinance is being implemented? What have your/your client/constituents experiences been?  Sarah: Our e xperience has generally been super positive. When a tenant falls under the criteria to use TPP, it makes a big difference, like the 120 -day notice requirement for certain evictions and certain successes in the hearing process. o Improvements could be made:
i. Make sure it applies to more people – like single family homes (SFH), as there is a l ot of SFH stock in Sacramento. Not all subsidized housing is created equal, so it would be very helpful to take an additional look to see if some can be included. HUD has ruled that voucher holders are protected by State tenant protections and SHRA has now ruled the same.
ii. The 12-month mark needs to lessen – too many folks are affected by that, landlords act in that 11th month.
iii. The 10% rental cap limit is high.
iv. Would be helpful if landlords were required to submit notices (termination and rental increase).
v. The 7-day requirement to file for hearing is a limitation, need to allow more time.
vi. Expansion of the way just cause is defined.
o It has good bones, just needs to be enhanced to protect more people.  Cathy: I endorse everything Sarah just said.

1. In terms of strengthening it – I agree, 12 -month standard, 10% rental cap increase being lowered, and SFH need to be covered.

2. Data collection and rental registry need to be more robust to understand what is working and what wasn ’t. Getting more information when units are being registered, i.e. what is the rent for the units and as Sarah stated notices of rent increase and terminations should go to t he TPP. Many other programs in the surrounding area are robust and take this information in without that information you really don’t know what is happening.

Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 9 3. Natural overlap between data collection with RHIP and TPP – overlap on housing conditions, etc. Should be overlap enough to get good information to share about conditions. Focus on more data collection to understand what ’s working and what’s not.
 City staff: Sing family homes are excluded under state law. Additionally, robust data collection is not just tied to staffing levels but also program fees. Some of those programs charge over $200 per unit to maintain the staffing to receive and log that type of data.
 Sarah: If you needed to charge $250 per unit for landlords that’s okay, it ’s a business and there is a cost to doing business. If you are going to be a landlord , you have to be prepared. Vickie you are right, the Costa Hawkins Act does AB 1482 City can have a narrower exemption – it includes many SFH – for example, those who are owned by corporations. There are ways to have localities include these housing types . 1946.2 of Civil Code is what allows localities to pass the ordinances to be more protective – might want to look at that to see what it might allow.
 City staff: Additionally, per state law, single family homes w/ADUs are covered.  Cathy: Tenants and residents need to know much more about this program. Clearly tenants have no idea this program exists. There has g ot to be a better way of education and get ting information out there. Perhaps require landlords on an annual basis to provide notice to tenants (City can provide notice). There is a deficiency in getting the information out there and letting people know the protections that exist.
 Jovana: Our organization was not happy with the TPP for the first couple years. I have helped several tenants call the TPP line and send emails and I’ve called, and I haven’t gotten called back. I have called different times of the day, etc. and just get voicemail. For me those numbers are sad to see for a service agency. Are you tracking calls that aren ’t being answered? Or emails? Those that know of the program refuse to use the program because they have had bad interactions with the program. We want to figure out how to share it with tenants and making it tenant friendly. Email blasts, website, etc. don’t reach tenants. How can we reach out to tenants that are vulnerable? We do a lot of outreaches, happy to work with you guys to make sure we are connecting the dots for tenants.  Vickie: We do track phone calls and voice mails and answer on a first come, first serve basis. We don’t provide services outside of ordinance, such as harassment.

If someone comes to us when in unlawful detainer – it is beyond our reach. We only cover no fault evictions and terminations of tenancy. o Cathy: All the more reason that there be a proactive effort to get information out to tenants. Try to provide resources if we cannot assist. o Jovana: It would be great to share the full number of c alls and emails, not just the cases.
o Sarah: Agree, numbers seem to be undercounting.
o Cathy: All the more important for data collection and reporting. o Vickie will provide that data to Greta for her to disseminate.

Attachment 3-Tenant Protection Program Stakeholder Meeting Summaries 10  Cathy: Worst thing in the world is for someone who has a legitimate complaint but they are not able to respond in a timely manner. All the more reason to give them this information once they move into a unit.
o Vickie: Staff does reach out to tenants and will schedule appointment s for them to come in as they might not have access to a computer. We help to copy documents and assist them with helping to collect the data. We do all we can to help the tenants to ensure they are served.
 Sarah: We can set triggers for landlords to have to serve and sub mit notices – landlords have better capacity as they are running a business. o We also encounter these common abuses which should be looked at:
i. Owner move in – some are suspect. There has been some work on the state level but need to look at tightening that up. Identify who they are talking about in the family and maybe other information and consequences if it doesn’t go down accordingly.
ii. Substantial rehabs – they should have to show permits. We do like the 120-day notice.
iii. Withdrawal from the rental market – they are selling it but that does not necessarily mean it is withdrawn (i.e. duplexes, apartment complex). Honing in on the sale as not being a qualifier for withdrawal.
iv. Would be interesting to explore exhaustion compon ent before they can file an Unlawful detailer – maybe requiring them to file at City first before they can file elsewhere. Worth perhaps future conversation about nitty gritty language on how to explain and tighten it so that it does more of what everyone wants it to do. o Vickie: We currently do collect data such as who is moving into the property for owner move in and follow up is done as well to ensure they have moved in. They also do assess penalties to those who do not move in and then the tenant can sue the property owner in civil court. We have been successful in tracking owner move ins.
o Sarah: Would love to keep the penalties in the City toolbox and perhaps expand enforcement to those landlords that don’t align.

Discussion Question 2
If Council were to direct changes to the program, what would your top priorities be for potential changes?

The meeting time ran up, but participants stated that they would email additional comments related to his question.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 1 TENANT SURVEY
A survey was conducted to gather input on the effectiveness of the Tenant Protection Program from tenant perspectives. The survey was circulated via email, social media, and radio announcements, and was made available in Spanish and English. The survey received 330 total responses, 304 of which stated that they lived in the City of Sacramento. Results from City of Sacramento residents are included below:

15 22 20
119
30 43 45
10 0
20 40
60 80
100
120
140
Respondents by City Council District
15 289
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Own (please exit the survey if you
have not lived in a rental in the
past 5 years.)
Rent
Do you rent or own?
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 2 4
126
7 45
11 111
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
ADU (Additional Dwelling Unit) or In-
law Unit
Apartment
Condominium
Duplex
Government subsidized/regulated
affordable rental
Single Family Home
What type of unit do you live in?
29 112
34 0
20 40
60 80
100
120
Don't know No Yes
Was the rental unit you reside in built
after February 1, 1995 (Respondents living
in ADUs, Apartments, Duplexes only)?
125
2064
95 How do you feel your rent compares with
similar rental units within your area?
About the same Don't know Higher Lower
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 3  50 respondents (16%) claimed to have been unlawfully evicted o 17 of these individuals (34%) were aware of resources available to tenants

144
62 98
Are you familiar with the City of
Sacramento’s Tenant Protection Program
No Somewhat familiar Yes
108
134
62 How familiar are you with the protections
afforded under the Tenant Protection Act?
Not at all familiar Somewhat familiar Very familiar
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 4 36
218
50 0
50 100
150
200
250
Don't know No Yes
Have you or someone you know been unlawfully
evicted between July 1, 2019 and today?
32 52
27 193
0 50
100
150
200
250
Don't know No Yes Not applicable
If Yes, were you or someone you know aware
of any resources available to tenants?
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 5 If yes, what resources were known? 1
 Fund and legal to help
 What I learned was that NONE of the protections applied to me and my family because it was a single family home. We were harassed for over three years.

Our rent was raised over $900 in three raises in less than 9 months. Nobody could or would help me. We lived there for over 13 years. Once a property management company took over we were harassed monthly. All through Covid.

Finally they were allowed to raise our rent $400, $200 & $250 within a nine month period. None of the laws applied nor do they apply currently. Talk about a crack in the system! Neither the mayors office nor Guerra’s office even responded to us!
 Google, sac tenant rights
 Laws were located after research
 Tenant Protection Program, Renter's Help Line, tenants union, ACCE, LSNC  ACCE
 Websites and people to help file paperwork
 Legal Services of Northern California, Tenant Protection Program, Attorney General's Housing Strike Force
 Tenants Protection Act
 TPP , Legal services via City of Sacramento, TPP programs in other counties that provide information, State laws. Still didn't save me, I was forced to leave my apartment because TPP's evil head lady helped my landlord push me out.  You have to ask her I know she went before the city council  Tenants Together, ACCE, Organize Sacramento, Sacramento Tenants Union, TPP phone number
 Resource available through the City, like the Tenant protection program and some nonprofit resources
 Lawyer
 A court order is needed, and is an agency was paying you rent the landlord accepted to wait they where not suppose to put you out
 Lawyer
 CA tenant guide
 free legal guidance
 Mental health and childcare
 2-1-1, renters help line, legal northern of California, small claims court  There was an attempt to evict me and my son , approx 3&1/2 yrs ago. I thwarted the managers eviction plan. I was able to find evidence needed to prove of wrongdoing on his part. In the end he was the one who had to move as well as find a new job. I never did find out if he was able to just move to a different complex or not. I hope he didn’t . This was the time I discovered the city of Sacramento website . I think I contacted you guys back then but I’m not certain.

1 Responses in blue represent respondents that stated that they lived in the City of Sacramento and made contact with the City’s Tenant Protection Program.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 6  Fair Housing
 Legal Services of Northern California, Sacramento Justice League,  Carol Miller's Justice Center 2nd Floor. I won 5 suits but collected zero from the Dlum lord. Gee vs. Weatherbee.
 I told them it was illegal. And they have lost the will to fight  Tenant Protection Program
 legal services of norcal

18 230
56 0
50 100
150
200
250
Don't know No Yes
Have you or anyone in your household ever
contacted the City of Sacramento Tenant
Protection Program?
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 7 30
11 0
22 8
5 7
25 8
0 5
125
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Concerns about a proposed rent
increase
Getting a security deposit back
Loss of a service such as parking
or storage
Landlord asked that I/we move out
(e.g., 30-day or 60 –day
termination notice)
Landlord asked that I/we move out
due to Owner Move-In
Landlord asked that I/we move due
to Withdrawal of Rental Unit from
the Rental Market
Landlord asked that we move out due
to Substantial Repairs
Issues getting the landlord to
address habitability concerns
(e.g., vermin, mold, heat, water,…
Non-payment of rent, nuisance, or
breach of lease
Buy-out agreements
Voluntary termination of tenancy
I have never contacted the City of
Sacramento Tenant Protection
Program
If yes, what was the reason for contact
(Select all that apply)?
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 8 Other reasons2:
 At one point she said she would move in with me with her partner. She also said she was going to move in and place a roommate in one of the other bedrooms.  I have had a landlord ask us to move so he could sell the house. He did not provide proper notice (he told us over text) and when we moved out he did not sell it. He raised the rent from 2k to 2800. At my next house I was only there for a year when the own asked us to move so he could move back in. At my current place I pay $3500 and with the way landlords raise the rent every single year, I’m afraid I won’t be able to live in Sacramento much longer. I am a teacher with SCUSD and I’ve lived here for over 20 years. I am tired of all my income going to insane rent prices and having to move every couple of years when landlords want more money.
 Other cost issues
 We were being harassed for over three years. It was death by 1,000 cuts. Now the property management company has sent a $12000 claim against my credit without ever notifying me, billing me, talking to me..just because they legally can make a claim without ever communicating with me and if I refuse to pay it it stays on my credit for 7 years..CONTINUED HARASSMENT!
 Clarification on program requirements.
 Property Manager cited tenant program in requiring tenant to provide signature in person after apartment inspection.
 Landlord refuses to answer questions regarding lease.  Contacted the city because terms of lease contradicted information given about utilities being included
 Code enforcement issues work done without permit and failure to fix unit. Also was only offered an 11 month lease so they don’t have the renew  Harassment
 I have worked with a number of tenants over the years and have helped them reach out to the TPP on multiple occasions for a variety of reasons.  Contacted them when I was a landlord
 New landlord purchased complex and wanted everyone to leave for remodels.

He intimidated some people into leaving, and bought out others. The landlord was a former lawyer, he knew what he was doing. He wasn't afraid to play dirty.  who to contact due to sub-strandard housing
 I need to contact them i didn’t know who could help me.  Landlord harassment, destruction of lease when property was purchased by new owner
 Weatherbee did a constructive eviction.

2 Responses in blue represent respondents that stated that they lived in the City of Sacramento and made contact with the City’s Tenant Protection Program.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 9 39
7 14
Was your reason for contact resolved by the
Tenant Protection Program? (Applicable
respondents only)
No To be determined Yes
151
79 56
17 What percentage of your gross income do you
spend on rent each month?
30-50% Less than 30% More than 50% Prefer not to say
99 146
69 0
50 100
150
200
No Unsure Yes
Based on your personal experiences, do you
believe that the Sacramento Tenant
Protection Act is effective in protecting
tenants against unfair rent increases and
unjust evictions?
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 10 If you do not believe that that the Sacramento Tenant Protection Act is effective in protecting tenants against unfair rent increases and unjust evictions, what changes to the Tenant Protection Act would have helped your personal experience?

English Responses:
 As a hearing participant, I had a great experience with staff, but the hearing itself was extremely dehumanizing. 1) I think there needs to be a screening process for those with disabilities. There is an equity issue without there being a warm handoff to those that could assist those with disabilities. There is nothing protecting tenants from fair housing act issues related to protected populations. 2) I was told that I could submit evidence up to the day of the hearing, but a letter I provided from Project Sentinel did not even get read by the hearing examiner.

The examiner was a lawyer that seemed to be swayed more towards the rights of the landlord, not the tenant. The other tenant on the other side of the duplex also had the same experience. I also do not think it is equitable for landlords to show up to the hearings with attorneys when tenants do not have those types of resources. I had no experience whatsoever and had no attorney. I felt like a criminal in my hearing and the examiner let it happen and was extremely unprofessional. The examiner even stated that they made their decision before the entire hearing happened so I felt like the entire hearing had no purpose since he already made his decision. 3) In my case, I had lived on the property in one side of a duplex. The landlord asked me to move to the other side of the duplex and clean up all of her belongings while she was out of the country. I did all of that and put my own money into the unit in exchange for her promise of stable rent. She served me an eviction notice a week before the 12 month period. It should be made clear in the ordinance that the 1 year mark is for tenancy on the property, not in a specific unit.
 Protection against nuisance neighbors trying to get you to move.  Rent increases are still outpacing wage increases.
 Justly applying all protections to the incredible amount of families that rent single family homes and receive NO PROTECTIONS! Now the property management company has sent a $12000 claim against my credit without ever notifying me, billing me, talking to me..just because they legally can make a claim without ever communicating with me and if I refuse to pay it it stays on my credit for 7 years..CONTINUED HARASSMENT!
 I think rent increase percentage should be lower. I think there should be requirements for landlords in communicating with tenants Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 11  10% of $2000+ rent starts to add up year after year. In just a few years, rent can go from $1700 to over $2200. It feels like 10% is too high to offer much protection if your landlord uses it to their advantage.  There’s not enough damn housing. We need more housing and it needs to be rent restricted. My landlord is great and this place is well kept. It’s his retirement.

I just don’t understand why we can’t get more housing for everyone. It’s simple supply and demand. You build enough housing the rent goes down.  Rent increases will continue to outpace raises in income across the city indefinitely because all landlords will raise rent together at the max amount which is why rent is so high already. Meanwhile I have received a 2.5% raise per year for the past few years (and I feel like one of the lucky ones to even receive a raise) so I’ve had to get a 2nd job and work 80 hour weeks, otherwise I couldn’t afford my bills and rent. Meanwhile the landlord drags their feet anytime something needs to be fixed and hasn’t really done anything for us to earn all of the rent increases. I understand they need to make money but we have received no value in exchange for the $600 monthly increase over the past few years and feel as if they will find a reason to push out if we ask for anything based on their attitude when contacted. We live in a very low income area and pay $2000 but it’s all we can afford otherwise we’d be homeless. Anyone I’ve known that receives a better raise yearly already makes enough to own a home.  I was referred to SHRA, but they did not help with rent increase.  If an apartment complex is part of the program how can they offer 11-month leases? Also there is no communication with code enforcement and repairing units. This TPA should also address substandard living conditions it does not address those issues at all and needs to tie into the rent increases and evictions.  If landlords know about this protection policy, then why are they still harassing tenants?
 We need better laws to direct how landlords do mold remediation. Right now there are no official standards so a landlord could place fans and spray an affected wall or floor with bleach and paint over it and call it remediated. All that does is cause the mold to release mycotoxins. The affected drywall/ceiling/flooring/carpeting needs to be removed with large margins and proper containment procedure needs to be followed. Standardized testing should be required too.
 Limiting a rent increase by even 10% annually can still be a lot of money. They should have to show reason for the increase, not just be able to raise it because the calendar turned a page. If the amenities are not maintained, if there has been damage to the unit with minimal resolution, if the appliances are several decades old, if there are ongoing crime/safety issues why should I pay the increase because they are clearly not meeting their end of the contract that I signed.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 12  Be involved in all eviction processed
 My landlord raises the rent every year, usually around 5%. After this act it seemed to incentivize them to raise it by the maximum allowed which was 9%.

Something more like SF's rent protections which seem to keep the cost of a rental unit close to the same or nearly the same as when the tenant moves in would have been better. This still does not do enough to protect renters.  The rent increase maximum is still too high.
 I am concerned that corporations/investors are buying up properties and increasing rents, forcing many out of their homes.
 It would be great if the Act covered leases shorter than a year a day. Most leases are exactly a year and are not covered by the Act.
 Would still like to see rent increases limited to less than 10%. 10% increases each year is not sustainable for renters.
 It is very restrictive on the single family homes owner, or duplex owners, now all the owners are now taking the property off market.
 It is very restrictive on the single family homes owner, or duplex owners, now all the owners are now taking the property off market.
 Hire staff with basic knowledge of California housing law, consult with tenants more than landlords if the purpose is actually to protect tenants, remove 1-year residency requirement for unjust evictions, lower rent cap to a level that would actually protect renters from being forced out, require relocation assistance for just cause evictions like the state law does
 Nothing to share
 People don't know about it and some people doing the work don't care. Just there to get paid. Lots of messages left but no return phone calls  Some landlords who have the ability to rent a family home at an affordable rate are hesitant to rent because the landlords don't have any protections that protect their home from excessive damage and squatters. Some people also cant afford to rent their homes out at an affordable rate because the city takes too much in permit fees and the cost of living is too high for them as well.  Commercials to provide awareness of the program.
 Assistance with identifying and correcting landlords who "loses" paperwork and rental agreements; landlords who take advantage of subsided programs only to later evict tenants; landlords who keep deposits when selling the property  More oversight and quicker response from SHRA. Seniors in particular who are isolated need more support.
 Deposit and rent to high
 It's all needs to be redone the who rent increase is over the top. All they have to do is evicte a tenant then hike up the rent to what ever they feel is good for them not the renters.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 13  Having the Tenant Protection Act more accessible to the renters. A Tenant Protection Act pamlet or literature given to every new renter when signing their renter's agreement/conteact. The property manager point out specific contact numbers and emails.
 When I called for help because I’m in a single family home the issues did not apply to me per the customer service rep.
 Stop making landlords house people who damage their property &/or do not pay rent. The court process is unreasonably long -many months. It should be a few weeks, not months. Landlords cannot subsidize housing in the way the legal system forces on them via LONG periods of time waiting for courts to settle.

STAFF & FIX the court system, please.
 Make the process of serving legal documents (UD, Summons) strict to avoid abuse by landlords. Current standards are often circumvented.  Come to apartment complex’s to explain their program.  Rent control for newer rentals, and single family dwellings.  Awareness of program, better protections
 Board public education on protection
 Prevent scamming tenants who just use the system for free rent! If you own a property you pay all the taxes, repairs and high costs! limiting rent increases leave owners no incentive to rent those owners who do not raise the rent above 10% should get a tax write off to offer some relief from high repairs, and utility costs.
 Unfortunately the Tenant Protection Program has a really awful woman in charge, or at least they did in 2021/2022. She contacted my landlord without my permission and effectively helped force me out. Exactly the opposite of the intention of the TP Act. Additionally, the TPP has been allowing maxmimum rent raising for years. Each year, allowing the maximum. YIKES! Please help the people, not the rich landlords. Maybe stunt the maximum allowance of rent raising for once. Why is it always 9% every year? Why are people paying $1600- $2500 in the Sacramento area for a one bedroom? This has to stop. The TPP needs to take action and make this better. This is likely why there are so many people experiencing homelessness, because they simply cannot afford to live in a home.
 renters need copies of any code enforcement reports, especially the ones the renters make themselves. renters also need copies of any letters sent to their landlords by the city.
 The program helps less than 5% of the tenant population in Sacramento and that number is probably too high. My landlord told me the City has two tenant programs which charge him fees every year and he adds that total to my rent. He said my rent would be a little lower if the City didn't charge these fees which Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 14 basically assist a very small portion of the tenant population. I would recommend getting rid of these programs since I have never used them and of all my friends, none of them know anyone who has used the program.
 either assisted or refer to agency that had power or authority to assist  I think the total % that landlords can increase rent needs to be capped at a lower rate than currently allowed (10%).
 Just cause needs to start on Day 1. Single family homes need to be covered.  more info to the public
 I am a landlord and have fair price increases to my tenants, but I have found that some landlords rent is too low for the cost of repairs on properties and find that we’re seeing more and more properties and disrepair because of this issue. I also just read that a lot of properties for sale around the country are fixer uppers according to an article I just read. I feel that some things in the tenant protection are good and some are bad. It is very expensive to run a property and make money Due to the increased costs of repairs and upgrades. Inflation has also affected landlords, and I don’t see any concern for them by the city. Some of these same landlords have not kept up on increased rents and I don’t think your policies help them in any way. If the city is going to continue to Look out for one side only we are going to see more and more problems associated with housing.

Please let them know. They need to have a more balanced approach.  Rent control, make it illegal to profit human right, ban corporations from owning rental units.
 Eviction is not the issue. Rental cost gouging is why most rentals stay open. My rent doubled in 5 years. I work two jobs now. Teacher and tutor to afford rent.  Rent should not go up so often.
 Should include sfh. The rules are too complex. Should be a blanket rile for all renters, no built after a certain time etc is just makes it too convoluted.  I sold my District 8 duplex and, being very knowledgeable about the TPP) prevented my tenants from being unlawfully evicted by the new owner. My former tenants had no clue about the TPP and would have been completely taken advantage of otherwise. The TPP should require all tenants receive a brochure about their rights at time of move-in like other required information.  Rent shouldn't be able to be raised every year. Pay isn't increased every year so eventually the increases will force tenants to move.
 9% is rather high... SF is 3%
 If there's any way to make rents lower, obviously I see that as a very pressing issue and risk point in the current system considering that many middle class renters could wind up homeless if things don't change (and the homeless crisis is already very bad). I'm concerned that rents will continue going up in the future if property taxes go up, and if landlords have increases to home insurance with Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 15 climate change (or are even unable to get insurance in some areas prone to climate-related issues). I worry these burdens will continue falling on renters who are already spending too much of their income on rent and we'll only have an increase in the homeless crisis if we don't tackle this vulnerable population. I'm not sure what the solution is but I have ideas and there must be a way to require city-wide that rent stay fair and doable (based on the average living wages people are actually earning). Living wages aren't going up but the cost of living is, so I see renters in a vulnerable and unsustainable position if rent continues going up at the rate it has been. I know some landlords are also struggling to make ends meet and many are also in an increasingly vulnerable position with rising costs and uncertainty; I wonder how we can solve this housing problem for everyone and build a more sustainable housing system across the board for all. I love how the city lifted zoning limits and is exploring the option of having more units on properties, and I wonder if this could be one creative solution. Perhaps landlords could be rewarded or even incentivized for turning their properties into multi-unit rentals (i.e., adding an ADU) so that rents can be lower for individual tenants. Also, I think that for each unit, the city could calculate the average salary of individuals living in that neighbordhood and enforce that rent is never allowed to be above a certain percentage of the average residents' salary, period. Once landlords are receiving that level of income from the unit, they could be incentivized and even supported by the city to expand their property into more rental units or get involved in a community-based property. I'm not sure how we'd protect home-owner landlords and think this is also a need, but perhaps home owners could receive some protection from the city from going under water over unexpected increases like home owners insurance and climate-related uncertainty/issues. If landlords had multiple rental units on their property, I feel that's a win-win because it at least brings increases their security from the possibility of unexpected increases to their expenses when they have multiple income streams. Maybe the city could contract with companies that help build ADU's to somehow get good deals or incentivize a massive community-wide project to building lots of ADU's on rental propertie. Overall making it more accessible for landlords to easily aned quickly expand their property seems necessary since there are likely a large portion who could. Lastly, maybe there could be "community-owned rental units" as a way that home-ownership can be more possible for everyone. Imagine if each neighborhood had Community- Owned Co-Living Units. The city could build massive community-owned co-living rental spaces where individuals can purchase a "portion" of the unit from the city itself. Many people can no longer afford to buy a house, and even existing landlords may be on the cusp of not quite able to expand their house or purchase another house. But many people might be able to afford to invest in a portion of a Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 16 community-owned property in their neighborhood, almost like when you invest in stock and own a share of a company, or work for a co-opperative company. I'm imagining it as kind of a middle-road option between renting and buying where some folks could live in or own a portion of a community-based rental unit in their neighborhood. Having more on-ramps for creative ways people can build housing-based income might expand the middle class when currently there's such a huge gap between renters barely able to make ends meet, home owning landlords concerned about uncertain futures, and the very wealthy who own many properties. Maybe community-based housing projects could be a middle- road creative option for ways that many folks across the income brackets can become "semi-owners" owning a portion of a property in their neighborhood.

Major corporations like Zillow are buying up lots of property and killing the housing market for individuals, but maybe the community itself could buy up some properties in each neighborhood and kind of "loan" them to local residents, almost like a rent-to-own or "share-based" contract. This also could foster more feelings of community when people feel invested in their local community because more people get to participate in "ownership." Maybe there could even be sliding-scale options in community-owned properties that could help prevent homelessness; for example, perhaps some people could receive slightly discounted rent from the city if they do a work-trade where they are involved in community-beautification and protection projects. They could live in the community shared housing and actively participate in beautifying their community. I'm a Psychologist and I think community-based housing options like these could overall solve a lot of social issues because it addresses not only the financial needs but the psychological needs that contribute to a lot of the issues society faces today. If people were more actively involved in their community in this way and felt "ownership" it creates feelings of belonging and community which ultimately foster safety and well-being for everyone. Just some creative ideas!
 We can only afford our rent because we are a joint household and even then, just barely. We cannot move or find a bigger place (despite needing one) because starting a new lease would make it difficult to pay for other essentials. Rent, in general, is too high given inflation. A cap on rent would be preferable but realistically, probably unattainable. Also, the tenant protections come in conflict with tenants who abuse/disturb the peace for other neighbors. For example, our neighbors (a couple) have horrendous, shouting, violent fights that often last days and into the early hours of the morning (3am), even during the week nights.

This is just one example of how they affect the peace of all the other tenants.

Police have been called and PM notified multiple times, but they have not been able to be removed due to the statues in this Act. This issue, in combination with Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 17 the inability to afford to rent elsewhere, makes living here stressful. Nobody wants to feel trapped due to rising rent and nightmare neighbors. My suggestion is to brainstorm how to bridge the gap/define this gap between tenant protections from unlawful evictions and abuse of these protections.  Written statement from the owner stating they are selling the house.  It should be expanded to include single family homes and properties built before 1995. Homeowners that rent out their homes are charging more than their mortgage (substantially more) and keep asking for more money every year or when tenants move out. The rent increases in the Sacramento area are astronomically and comically high given the income earning potential in this city and area. It's shameful that homeownership is nearly impossible and renting is becoming impossible. This greed and inflation cause homelessness, which only compounds all other societal problems in our area.
 Single homes older than 1990 or 2000 should be covered. Our rental in only 920 sq ft and 2 bd, 1 bath, should be taken into consideration. We live in area 95815.  Face to face outreach sometimes internet is not available , would appreciate a phone number to text to my concerns
 There should be more marketing material and resources when it comes to knowing our rights as tenants.
 Direct advocacy and contact with the landlord illegally evicting.  It is a waist of money and man power.
 More protections for landlords who end up trapped with nuisance renters protected by the Act. The Act treats all landlords as if they’re wealthy, ill-intended and exploitative, rather than helping those with limited resources and only one or two rental properties.
 It is a waste of money. Disband the program.
 Single Family Residences and Newer Construction should be covered by the Tenant Protection Act. The maximum annual rent cap should be lowered to 5%. A $150 or more monthly rent increase each year can quickly push people into homelessness, since no one's income rises that much! Those who are fortunate enough to own their own homes financed by 30-year fixed rate mortgages don't suffer this type of housing insecurity, yet they get ALL the tax benefits. Renters get NONE unless they're very low income, in which case they get a whopping $60 a year. Renters, who comprise nearly 50% of all California residents, due to housing unaffordability, constantly get the short end of the stick in Sacramento and in California.
 Rent increase, responsibilities of house repairs when not my fault especially when I'm charged rental insurance, no upkeep from property management.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 18  People I know who have used it did not help them. We also need better rent control so that those who cannot receive the help they need can have secure housing if they have to move.
 Better awareness of program, perhaps clinics.
 See below
 The problems are in the implementation. The Tenant Protection Program did not respond to me in a timely manner after repeated attempts. Running out of time, I finally reached out to the Tenant Union who recommended I copy them on an email, which did appear to work as I did hear back from the TPP shortly after.  Cap the increases based on income at 3% , tenants should have anti harassment from the landlords and corporate landlords shouldn't be able to buy up local properties.
 Just not educated but thankfully Afternoon FIFTEEN years I finally got into subsidized housing thanks to Diligence &:Congressman Bera. I AM beyond thankful but Repairs & reasonable accommodations are another issue but I will Be thankful I have A roof over my head .45 years of Great jobs & I end up here but honestly still thankful.
 We need tighter regulations on rent control, such as increase to not exceed 3%  Increased staffing/funding (my issue was never responded to).  Allow the market to continue to bring rents down.
 With rent prices as high as they are, a 10% increase in rent every year becomes very costly. Without fail - every year a 10% increase.
 They need to stop asking 2 to 3x the income to move in for people recieving SSi SSDi or Survivors pay. And stop charging other fees and utilities should be included in the rent for student housing or for social security Beneficiaries .  Provide same resources to landlords who provide safe, healthy and affordable housing.
 The program needs to be much more proactive and use its enforcement authority to penalize the many many slumlords and otherwise outlaw landlords in the city.

There is also a serious lack of knowledge about the program amongst tenants in the city. Most tenants I have worked with either don't know about the program or assume it will not cover them. The TPP's mandate should be strengthened as well. Waiting a year to get eviction protections is not acceptable and gives landlords an incentive to evict people in the first year. Also, the rent cap is far too high and is contributing to homelessness as people are receiving unaffordable rent increases and having to decamp to the streets in order to survive.  owners of apartments and other rentals need to be directly contactable. managers, who are not owners, are not accountable
 I don’t feel that the information is easy to understand or access Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 19  The City needs to do more to let tenants know about the protections. The City should promote the program and there should be more people at the City answering questions. We called so many times and did not get any one to answer
 Get rid of it. Just makes people not want to rent out to folks. I’ve seen so many renters take advantage of landlords because they were protected by failed government programs.
 I was told my landlord was doing multiple unlawful things but that I would need a lawyer. I couldn’t afford that at the time.
 Higher percentage rent protections and limitations on increases. Landlords are able to raise rent 10% per year, and they are. Within 10 years, my rent will have doubled and effectively priced me out of living here.
 Lower the percentage they are allowed to increase rent by, it's usually always at the highest or very close to it.
 Not necessary
Spanish Responses:
 Lamentablemente aún con la ley de protección,muchos inquilinos siguen siendo desalojados,por muchas razones,por ej.pir no poder pagar la mensualidad y por no poder pagar un abogado que los defienda
 Que se imformen de sus derechos ,y que si cumplan la ley fe protector mm Non-City of Sacramento Respondents:
 rent limits. 10% a year seems based off previous year, not first year, so it compounds quickly. no increases 3 years in a row. no more than one increase for existing tenant per 3 years. no more than x% of inflation. lots of options to help keep rent down.
 Removing predatory landlords, having actual accountability for them so they don't just buy/sell property yearly to each family member to hike rates. STOP corporate housing landlords in residential areas.
 Smaller rent increase cap. Nobody gets 10% pay increases every year, so rent increases should not be permitted to go anywhere near that high. Eliminate 1 year requirement for protections.
 No my personal experience, but other people I know have not had luck contacting them or are fearful to
 Lower the yearly percentage rent can be increased

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 20 Do you have additional comments that you would like to share pertaining to the City’s Tenant Protection Program?
English responses:
 There needs to be protections for habitability issues. I experienced a retaliatory eviction. As a tenant, I had been making improvements to the property myself and the first time did not offer to pay for something ourselves she requested that we move out. I was taken advantage of as a disabled tenant. We need a much better process for screening hearing examiners. The process is extremely traumatic and there was clearly no trauma informed anything happening. The hearing was extremely harmful to me. It would be great if there could be a warm handoff to a mental health resource in house that could provide 1-2 mental health sessions after the hearing.
 Councilman EG has been useless.
 Landlords should be required to provide tenants with a handout/email about this program when they sign a lease and once per year by mail/email.  You let my family down. We lived in our neighborhood for almost 15 years. I operated multiple neighborhood businesses and contributed to my community daily. My wife has been an employee of the State for over 20 years. We pulled both our kids from private schools and put them in public schools to help the community. We were subject to over three years of harassment and bullying and abuse and received no help from anyone until finally being subject to over $900 in rental increases in a nine month period and forced to move. Now the property management company has sent a $12000 claim against my credit without ever notifying me, billing me, talking to me..just because they legally can make a claim without ever communicating with me and if I refuse to pay it it stays on my credit for 7 years..CONTINUED HARASSMENT!
 This plan actually costs my landlord money and likely is causing an increase in my and everyone else’s rent.
 The rent increases need to be clamped down to pace with income growth for the area instead of some arbitrary round percentage
 To make SHRA comply with Tenant protection program
 No
 Yes. Coordinate with code enforcement and make a global report for the complex. Repairing substandard housing and rent increases and evictions go hand in hand. This complex is a repeat offender and nothing seems to be done about it. They offer only 11-month leases to avoid the protections offered to Cotys TPP . This is American River Commons complex and Linq Complex. Both seem to operate by same principles and/or joint ownership.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 21  All of this information must be shared to all tenants so we are not left in the dark regarding are rights no matter what. Where is the paperwork to read or having it read to us?
 Yes, it's highly ineffective. I lost literally everything including my housing and my health and no one would help me. Not the city, and not the state. No attorney will take my case. I have no recourse to recover anything and have been in short term rentals since November 23rd.
 I've been threatened with rent increases by more than 10%/year, until I quoted the law. Landlords should be prohibited from making illegal threats because not everyone knows about the increase limit.
 I've lived in Sacramento since the late 80's and the rent has become wildly out of control in every area. Can't a generalized cap be placed on the amount an owner can charge based on sqft, amenities, or location? The rents are rising faster than any of us see cost of living raises.
 No
 Public needs to be more aware that this program exists. Suggest flyers posted in community centers and laundry mats, for example.
 If it didn't exist, we'd no longer live in Sacramento.  Better protections please. Currently it allows close to 10% increases, and most people do not get more than a 3-5% increase in income a year. Especially those that work for the state or the CSU system.
 I am happy that there is moderation of the rent increases. However, I think even the size of the rent increases allowed may continue to contribute towards people being priced out. With current economic conditions, 9-10% a year is still quite a bit, and when compounded, it's a lot. However, I am grateful that this program prevents even larger increases.
 How about making landlords pay for water, sewer, and trash. The normal now is that the tenant pays for these items, which adds an additional $50-$175 to one's monthly rent.
 Please consider having a program that helps with fair housing that allows for a higher income limit as Sacramento is getting so expensive. Even in a two-parent working household, we are scraping by and it's not fair to everyone especially borderline middle class because we do not qualify for any resources like income limited housing or government assisted living units. Everyone is struggling, especially borderline Middleclass.
 The Sacramento Tenant Protection Act, helped me when my new landlady increased my rent. I was able to show her the law and she followed the law.

Thank you. Your survey did not mention the City of Sacramento website with the Tenant Protection Program information, as found the information online, submitted to landlord, and they followed this law. So I did not have to contact Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 22 anyone because the information was available online. I think City of Sacramento's website is very good in situations like this. Thank you.  I think more outreach is needed to landlords. I appreciate that the City makes available addresses for properties under the Rental permit program.  "find your council rep" should be a live link
 Leave us alone, things were better before you got involved. Landlord never raised my rent before your program. You said this would help tenants and all it does is make landlords increase the rent to cover your fees and money spent fixing things I didn't even care about.
 Thank you! Renters need it.
 The City should begin an informational campaign about this program. I'm a long- time renter in Sacramento, I work with the City professionally on many issues, and I'm involved in the local political community, yet I know very little about this program. I imagine people with fewer connections to the City government know even less on average.
 Potential sf homeowner said last tenant eviction took 6months which allowed tenants to live rent free for six months during the eviction court process, He said he cannot afford to pay mortgage and allow tenants to live free for 6 months during eviction process, He said that’s why they taking the house off rental market, Sacramento tenancy act it’s having a negative affect on Renter’s because owners taking property off market.
 Potential sf homeowner said last tenant eviction took 6months which allowed tenants to live rent free for six months during the eviction court process, He said he cannot afford to pay mortgage and allow tenants to live free for 6 months during eviction process, He said that’s why they taking the house off rental market market, Sacramento tenancy act it’s having a negative affect on Renter’s because owners taking property off market.
 I think the city should do a better job of informing the public of this program. At the very least, when signing your rental agreement, this information on the program should be included
 This program is a disgrace and a tragic disservice to the tenants of Sacramento who desperately need actual protection and advocacy.
 Thanks for your time and consideration.
 Lower the rent and deposits. Write a plan that correctly work for the poor not the rich. Not written a plan by the rich for the poor, so the RICH GET RICHER  If more homeowners felt protected by the city/ state and were assured that their properties were also protected from tenants who do not take care of the property they might be more willing to offer housing at affordable rate. It is unreasonable for expect someone to incur debt or pay out of their own pocket in order to Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 23 provide affordable housing for someone else or risk loss due to squatters rights.

Homeowners need more support so they can support others.  City has done well and should try to work with landlords to maintain good tenant conditions without excessive cost
 I would like Tenants to be more aware of their rights as renters. A monthly Tenant Protection Program meeting with Q & A for Sacramento City renters to attend.  It is fine to cap rent if you’re considering maintenance costs in this equation.

Inflation is not limited to those who rent. Upkeep of a property costs money.  The Rental Housing Inspection Program has a massive loophole that is being exploited regularly. Property Managers/Owners that are put on a self- certification process for inspections are abusing that courtesy. When a property is sold, The previous owners are under no obligation to share previous rental inspections that are required to be held for 3 years. This means that a new buyer of a building is effectively not liable for previous damages or habitability issues. Additionally, tenants are not allowed to request copies of the rental housing inspection report for their unit after they have completed the inspection.

Only property managers, owners, or city officers can obtain copies. When a property manager completes the self-certified inspection, but does not leave the option for the tenant to have a copy at the time of inspection, this creates a glaring loophole that they can essentially treat the inspection as if it never existed. If a tenant attempts to exert their rights in later court proceedings, they are unable to obtain copies of the inspection report that is held by the owner per statute. This is woefully inadequate and allows landlords to abuse the system of protections we have set up for the city.
 NEED HELP DEALING WITH HORRIBLE (possibly CORRUPT) APARTMENT MANAGEMENT: CTL Management. I am At Riverpointe Apts, they manage Woodbridge too; and thousands more apartments because they are in 3 States (Oregon, Washington, California). Help!!!!!!
 Rent is crazy and I’ll be homeless soon
 Please do more outreach programs.
 I have had prospective landlords take my application fee and never let me know if I had the apartment. I don’t think they ever ran the tenant application either. A total of $90 was never seen or talked about. I made numerous calls and emails with no resolution or response.
 The current rent protections are not enough. I am one pay check away from not affording rent. My rent is raised every year, and my pay check is not.  My family members are landlords so I know how much money they have to pay for up keep of their properties and rents being raised is the only way to keep their properties in good condition.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 24  Unfortunately the Tenant Protection Program has a really awful woman in charge, or at least they did in 2021/2022. She contacted my landlord without my permission and effectively helped force me out. Exactly the opposite of the intention of the TP Act. Additionally, the TPP has been allowing maximum rent raising for years. Each year, allowing the maximum. YIKES! Please help the people, not the rich landlords. Maybe stunt the maximum allowance of rent raising for once. Why is it always 9% every year? Why are people paying $1600- $2500 in the Sacramento area for a one bedroom? This has to stop. The TPP needs to take action and make this better. This is likely why there are so many people experiencing homelessness, because they simply cannot afford to live in a home.
 the city tpp needs to be more tenant friendly and do trainings for tenants, not just landlords.
 It seems to be a money grab by the City which in turn causes my rent to be higher than without the program.
 how do tenants protect themselves against landlords who utilize their rentals for drug purchases?
 I was renting from 06/2018 - 08/2023 and responded based on that time period. I became aware of State law re: renter protection sometime in 2022. I never knew there were additional City protections or resources. My rent was raised twice during the period and both times (I now know) the increases probably exceeded the allowable amount.
 If it doesn’t apply to ADU rentals it should because the city is actively encouraging their construction. Not applying it to ADUs gives landlords a nice work around from these protections.
 educate agency employees on assisting with housing problems, such as infestation of roaches, repairs not done, owner ignores fines or instructions to make needed repairs
 current residence has had several "managers" or "property managers" where they have not made much needed repairs, but raised rent in several units including mine without repairs being done. Don't know who to contact about this.

People on section 8 didn't get rent increases, just people like myself trying to live on social security.
 I have not lived within the city for longer than a year yet, so I am unsure how our rent will be affected once our initial lease term is up.  Please strengthen protections. For every homeless person we get off the street in Sacramento, 3 more fall into homelessness. Sacramento needs emergency rental assistance, too!
 This is the monthly breakdown of our rental charges for a two-bedroom/two-bath apartment: Rent: $2,553.00 Pet Rent: $50.00 Utility Charges, Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 25 (Water/Sewer/Trash): $70.00 Total: $2,673.00/per month Is pet rent legal? I thought it was considered an "illegal monthly rental increase"? Also, what is the legal amount and times, can a landlord increase the rent? My rent increases every year by at least $100.00. My rent equates to a mortgage payment, but I cannot afford to buy a house. This is outrageous. WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING!!!!! FOLLOW THE EXAMPLE OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY . THE

CITY MUST DO A BETTER JOB OF PARTNERING WITH HABITAT FOR HUMANITY . SEEMS LIKE THEY DO A BETTER JOB AT BUILDING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAN THE CITY.
 The Rental Assistance Programs in Sacramento County are really hard to get.

Salvation Army, Traveller's Aide, and Sacramento Emergency Rental Assistance (SERA) are always out of money. Shelter Inc used to help, but they don't serve Sacramento County anymore. I know none of these don't have anything to do with the City’s Tenant Protection Program, but it's worth mentioning because they should have something to do with it. If you want to live up to the name of "Protecting Tenants", you need to actually have the funds to prevent evictions for hard-working families who are living paycheck to paycheck. Kids and transitional age adults should not be experiencing homelessness, and if they do, the shelter system needs to actually have beds available to catch those who fall in the cracks. The system is unreliable at best and putting people in preventable danger at worst.
 When I did email a question, it took weeks to hear back and the response didn't even address the question. If my concern was not something that could be addressed, I wish they would have just said that. Also, I have less faith in the program than I did before I wrote in given the long response time that would not have helped if I was being evicted.
 Housing is a human right. It should be illegal to profit off of housing. Rentals should be managed as a public resource. Enact real rent control that prevents landlords from profiteering and driving up housing costs  Rental prices in Sacramento are at such record highs, most of us can barely afford to rent, if we can afford to rent at all. The number of signs posted in front of units advertising availability is testament to this. Sacramento renters need either lower rental costs or higher wages to survive
 The rent is too high. There is not a single disabled person or fixed income senior that can afford a standard one bedroom apartment. Either lower rents or raise the minimum wage and social security.
 This program is invaluable - it gave my family peace of mind from a landlord who is often uncommunicative and prone to deciding things at a whim. It kept us from becoming homeless.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 26  It seems really dumb that there are two rental protection programs in place. We had requests to be present for inspections at two different times from two different programs in the same year that seemed to be doing the same things.

Just felt like a redundant waste of our time and taxpayer resources.  My neighbor has already had a rent increase and has not even lived in the house for 1 year yet, also I do not think that the owners have a formal rental agreement or they do not state that they rent out that house
 Yea some landlords are slum lords and the state allows this.  I currently live in an apartment complex that was built in 1930s and there has been no renovation. I would like to propose the city to check all the residential buildings that were built before 1970 do be inspected and hold landlords accountable without increasing tenant's rent for upgrades and renovation.  Would like an e-copy of program
 Renting is an agreement between myself and my landlord I feel the Government getting involved between myself and my landlord is what’s causing hardships on us renters. By adding new and restrictive terms to landlords the government is keeping prices for rental units high by ensuring my landlord will raise my rent every year because there is a cap on how much he can raise it and inflation is real so even if my landlord didn’t want to raise my rent he would have to because he can’t raise it as needed so my landlord is being reactive to the government restrictions.
 The only reason I am able to afford an apartment as a young adult, single household state worker income, is because I live in a rent controlled apartment.

Rent control must be expanded. I'm grateful to live in Midtown close to where I work thanks to rent control policies.
 We have the best landlord. No rent increase since we moved in 4 years ago.

Rent includes w/s/g, pest control, landscaping. Perfect situation. We are truly blessed.
 The TPP should apply to all rentals regardless of year built, etc.  I didn’t know I could contact the City of Sacramento Tenant Protection Program. I will be doing so regarding concern over an upcoming rent increase effective 8/01/24
 No
 Bad people should be able to be removed
 I really appreciate all the city is doing to try to make housing more affordable and restore the middle class. I feel really lucky to live in a place that is proactively trying to come up with creative solutions to the housing crisis and build a sustainable future for everyone in Sacramento. It's such a great city and I know we have so many brilliant minds working on these problems trying to find solutions. I think Sacramento is on the cutting-edge in the nation and love that Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 27 our city is willing to try innovative solutions. I think we should think more creative, bigger, and bolder and even try out new housing solutions. I believe there are creative solutions and we need to think out of the box to build a new housing system that works for everyone.
 Is there a website for the Tenant Protection Act where I can view my rights and expectations I can have of my landlord? Does the TPA cover Capitol Area Development Agency apartments?
 Thanks for your work.
 I would like to know more
 I think the 10% cap is too high. I'm living on a fixed income, which doesn't go up 10% a year, but my rent does.
 protections like this are getting even more important as rents skyrocket faster than I've ever seen before
 I have questions not comments: What enforcement of this program is occurring? What information is being shared with residents? What agencies/organizations actively work against the expansion of this program? I'm guessing the realtor's association/lobbyist but do not know. Where will the results of this survey be published? Thank you for doing this survey!
 This program should be abolished. It just protects renters who are bad apples and increases costs and bureaucracy for the rest of us.  I do greatly appreciate tenant protection laws and the city's impressive efforts to curtail mistreatment of renters. I support this fully. Importantly the city must also make great strides to increase housing supply overall. Take a look at NYC and its housing crisis. It's great that lucky tenants in rent-controlled units are kept off the streets; however the reason rent rises is because supply does not meet demand—a fact landlords, real estate agents, and homeowners are more than willing to exploit to enrich themselves at the expense of us all. A combination of tenant-protection laws and an increase in the housing supply would do wonders to help all citizens to access one of the most basic and important societal needs.  I know my landlord has had difficulty evicting tenants who have caused trouble such as performing illegal activity like drug dealing, done significant damage to property, and habitually playing loud music all hours of the night. If this protection program is making it so difficult for landlords to evict tenants that are making it a nightmare for other good tenants, then something needs to change. As a good tenant who follows the rules, I shouldn't have to suffer or be to the one to move because it's so hard for my landlord to handle to take the action needed.  Not sure why rent is so high when the economy is more than ever suffering especially after Covid lock down. Investors were able to buy all the homes and rent them out at high rental costs.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 28  It just didn't feel like advocacy; it felt more informational. While I appreciate the info, I needed an advocate.
 What if rent could be tied to a percentage of a tenant's income, keeping it more manageable for tenants?
 Small property owners that own 1 or 2 rentals should be exempt from this Program. They are not the problem the multi property owners are.  Why are only tenants “protected”? What/where are the protections and services for landlords with limited resources who end up with troublesome renters?  This program does NOT keep people off the street. Use the money to encourage the building of more units so there is competition. That is what is needed.

Reduce regulation. Get your nose out of the people's business.  Single Family Residences and Newer Construction should be covered by the Tenant Protection Act. The maximum annual rent cap should be lowered to 5%. A $150 or more monthly rent increase each year can quickly push people into homelessness, since no one's income rises that much! Those who are fortunate enough to own their own homes financed by 30-year fixed rate mortgages don't suffer this type of housing insecurity, yet they get ALL the tax benefits. Renters get NONE unless they're very low income, in which case they get a whopping $60 a year. Renters, who comprise nearly 50% of all California residents, due to housing unaffordability, constantly get the short end of the stick in Sacramento and in California.
 There needs to be a freeze on rents. Freeze all associated fees associated with maintaining property if well maintained by owners, water, sewage, taxes  Rents in Sacramento are currently decreasing and remain lower than both the statewide median and the national median rental price. In addition, median rent in the City of Sacramento is lower than other surrounding cities like Roseville, Folsom and Citrus Heights. This supports that idea that the program is effective in its current form.
 I’m not a tenant but a landlord subject to the program. You should ask landlords about your program. There were already plenty of laws to protect tenants. These additional laws and regulations are hostile to landlords, giving the tenant more rights than the landlord, causing landlords to not want to rent their properties anymore. Politicians are always complaining that there is not enough housing, but these policies decrease the supply of housing, causing the rents to increase on the remaining available units. Overall, this program hurts the tenant more than helps. The City of Sacramento is exacerbating the housing shortage.  I am concerned about the timeliness of response to renters in crisis.  Yes there no protections for tenants, Sacramento could do alot better and listen to tenants and what they really need.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 29  I asked for a higher lip on the shower but they refused as it is an ADA apt., I'm scared to death of falling with every shower as the floor floods. Other safety issues were addressed but I was warned in 2021 if they weren't corrected REGARDLESS of who's at fault. I e. Garbage disposal blades broken, dishwasher flooding; I would be terminated. I am currently really reserved about asking for repairs. AGAIN desperate for affordable housing so I deal.  We need to match the rent control initiative of our sister city San Francisco in order to preserve diversity and protect marginalized people from displacement  I think it's great, it just needs more funding/staffing and more landlords need to be made aware of the program. I've seen multiple incidents where tenants asserted their rights under the TPP and the landlord ignored it because they were either unaware or unconcerned about any consequences
 Get corporations and "investment firms" OUT of the housing market! That's what's going to protect tenants.
 Theirs is nothing 211 is doing that provided emergency hotel vouchers or having anything on the affordable housing list for single occupants and people that receive SSI benefit and the department if human services wait list is back logged weeks to months out. Their is nothing that provides immediate assistance.

How can people receiving SSI or SSDI or Survivors pay ever afford to own a home or an apartment in sacramento when their income is being discriminated against they ask those recipients twice the income knowing damn well that’s all they get. Those rules for twice or 3x the income should not apply to people receiving limited benefits permanent from the government. Thats discrimination the ADA law needs to reflect that under reasonable accommodation but it doesn’t. Yall need to fix that. They need help ASAP they actually get permanent income but they out on the streets because apartments wont accept their income. That is blatant discrimination to require a unrealistic requirement from people receiving those benefits.
 Over policing landlords can backfire and cause higher barriers to renting  Think the program is not very important. Too much regulation in the City as it is.

City should focus on reducing open/public drug use, trash, etc. Tenant protection should be a low priority - it seems like a misguided attempt to help, but just makes things harder for tenants because it adds a burden on landlords, which then raises rent rates for tenants.
 The TPP has potential but is underutilized and has shied away from its duty to hold landlords accountable. The TPP should be the city's premier homelessness prevention program. Every person who is unlawfully evicted or can't afford a 9%+ rent increase may end up camping on our streets.
 keep the law but strengthen it
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 30  I would like clear information on the tenants protection program and how they help tenants
 I would like to talk to someone because i was asked to move so the owner could move back in but we never received our deposit back. They rushed us out!  Get rid of it completely and stop protecting people who abuse the system and makes it harder for the rest of us
 It’s not enough to have protections in place if you can’t actually enforce them.  Higher percentage rent protections and limitations on increases. Landlords are able to raise rent 10% per year, and they are. Within 10 years, my rent will have doubled and effectively priced me out of living here.

Spanish Responses:
 El estado o la ciudad como tal deberían crear viviendas accesibles para gente con pobreza y pobreza extrema y crear programas de ayuda cuando alguien no pueda pagar su renta.
 Este año me subieron la renta es mucho para una familia de 5 miembros.

Non-City of Sacramento Respondents:
 outlaw regulations prohibiting shade devices on patios or visible clothes drying, or window decor visible from outside apt, or modify them to be more lenient. it affects electricity bill a lot and is very controlling
 Attempt!
 You know what the problems are
 I believe we should have rent control this is why we have such a huge problem with homelessness no one can afford to survive anymore or we have to live with a roommate. It would be nice to be able to afford to live alone  Without this program landlords would put people out so they could raise rent to suit themselves. It would devastate families and make more homeless.  If I’m remembering correctly the tenant protection program was in effect during the Covid plandemic. This was helpful to add to my case concerning the manager who tried to evict me but only got a boomerang result.  This program should be known by everyone and not be gatekept  No substantive protections against mold. I took to small claims court and had an excellent case. But failed miserably because I was sick and couldn't think straight. I should have asked for a delay. No one should try to represent themselves when sick.
 Before this yearly increase of 10% "cap" on rent, we did not have 10% increases, they were lower. Since this 10% yearly maximum increase was put in place, that's what they automatically increase, 10% every year! This "protection" has caused rental increases even higher. They make us pay the maximum. This is Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 31 driving people out of what used to be a great state, making it unaffordable to live here. I live in Sacramento County.

PROPERTY MANAGER/OWNER SURVEY
An additional survey was conducted to gather input on the effectiveness of the Tenant Protection Program from property owner/manager perspectives. Results owners/managers of rental properties within the City of Sacramento are below:

29 125
2 0
20 40
60 80
100
120
140
I am a property
management professional
I am an owner I do not own or manage
rental properties in
the City of Sacramento
(please exit survey)
Do you own or manage rental properties in
the City of Sacramento? (All respondents)
5 46
105
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
Not at all familiar Somewhat familiar Very familiar
Are you familiar with the City of
Sacramento Tenant Protection Program? (All
respondents)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 32 10
146
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
No, I do not own or manage
multifamily rental units that
were built before February 1,
1995 (please exit survey)
Yes, I own or manage multifamily
rental units that were built
before February 1, 1995
Do you own or manage rental properties
covered under the program in the City of
Sacramento? (All respondents)
6 6
133
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
No Unsure Yes
Do you have rental units registered with
the Tenant Protection Program? (Applicable
respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 33 *Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

94 15 14 9 13
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
1-3 3-5 5-10 10-20 20+
How many multifamily properties do you own
or manage within the City of Sacramento?
(Applicable respondents only*)
1 9
4 61
23 2
14 5
26 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
District 1 - Lisa Kaplan
District 2 - Shoun Thao
District 3 - Karina Talamantes
District 4 - Katie Valenzuela
District 5 - Caity Maple
District 6 - Eric Guerra
District 7 - Rick Jennings
District 8 - Mai Vang
Equal spread among multiple…
Which City Council district are the
majority of your rental properties
located? (Applicable respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 34 90
55 0
20 40
60 80
100
No Yes
Have you as a property manager or owner
ever contacted the City of Sacramento
Tenant Protection Program? (Applicable
respondents only*)
14 2
2 6
5 26
3 0 10 20 30
Other (please specify)
Questions about maximum
allowable rent increases
Questions about rent
increase/termination of tenancy
noticing requirements
Questions about substantial
repairs
Questions about terminating a
tenancy
Questions about the program in
general
Questions about withdrawing
rental units from the rental
market
If so, what was the reason for contact?
(Applicable respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 35 *Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

Other reasons for contact:
 Inspection reschedule and other concerns.
 Questions about notification of registering properties under TPP  Mailing address error
 Attended a class on program; also payment issue
 Billing question
 Just for making payments/billing questions
 All of the above
 All of the above
 Questions and confirmation about annual TPP renewal
 Billing
 Invoicing, our account status, rent increases, program rules...  Information on annual renewal, part had to be by mail and part online. Disjointed process.
 I would not even know where to start as the City is so difficult.

23 96
26 0
20 40
60 80
100
120
No Not applicable Yes
Was your reason for contact resolved by the
Tenant Protection Program? (Applicable
respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 36 *Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

If no, why? (Please specify)
 Rent cost went up since the creation. Beside, the tenants protection is one sided.

Any rule/law has to protect everyone.
 This is a redundant program. It's similar to AB1482, but seems like another tax landlords are forced to pay at the local level for tenant protections that are already in place at the state level.
 Rents are currently regulated by State and local limits. Current Tenant/ Landlord laws protect tenants from unlawful acts by a landlord. This program is duplicative and adds an extra tax burden to residential real estate that results in higher rents that must be charged to tenants.
 I do not see any service that was added that did not already exist prior to this program. I echo the sentiments of other owners I know when I say that. It just feels like a redundant program that acts as an income stream to the city at the needless detriment of property owners since it really did not do anything new that benefit tenants from prior laws and programs to this one’s inception.  Costs keep going up
 This program takes property rights away and forces landlords to raise rents to the full amount aloud annually.
 Gives no protection to owners
 care not to
 The city should be promoting more housing supply, not actively punishing housing suppliers.
 It is just another tax against landlords. It restricts our rights. 115
23 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
No (please specify why)
Yes
Do you believe the Tenant Protection Program
has been valuable since its creation in 2019?
(Applicable respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 37  Burdensome to landlords
 Discourages further investment in housing
 The medicine is worse than the disease. Good intentions on the part of policymakers are oftentimes counterproductive to solving the actual problem of an imbalance of supply and demand.
 Hidden negative bias to landlord.
 Has not changed my operations
 It is only focused on protecting tenants no matter the cost to the property owners  Tenants do not need more protection. Owner's such as myself are already struggling while tenants try to take advantage.
 We already have this type of rent control statewide (AB1482) and the need for tenants to call about issues is stipulated in the code enforcement area of the city.  Indifferent
 We often let long term tenants go without rent increases for a long time. But then TPP becomes effective and now we’re stuck with severely low rents while our insurance and other costs go sky high.
 More government will not cure the bad owners. The good owners will leave the market with more restrictions.
 I pay for a service that I do not use
 Unintended consequences of “just cause of eviction” .. I have no problem with controlling rent increases…
 More red tape with no benefit
 Hurts landlords who rely on rental income!
 the program is highly "pro-tenant" and against responsible landlords and make it more difficult & expensive for us to rid a property of a disruptive or irresponsible tenant.
 It makes it harder for property owners to not increase rents every year  Not sure of its value to owners
 I do not know if it has or has not been valuable
 overlap program, does not add value and taxed at owners expense  The program places too many restrictions on property owners , Who should have more control over their property. It discourages people from becoming landlords.  I do not believe it provides any meaningful benefit to at risk tenants  It is more rules to memorize, we already have the state wide requirements that are sufficient.
 I believe it has done more harm than good, by placing tenants and landlords in more of an adversarial position and causing rapid increases in rents and dissuading landlords from giving tenants breaks by providing low rents. We have some very kind landlords who would likely rent units very inexpensively to a Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 38 tenant in need. Those landlords don't do that any longer because they know they would never be able to get to a market rent in the future if they made that choice.  It has forced landlords to increase rents more often to keep up with market values. Fair rate of return is a cumbersome process. It’s an infringement on basic property rights. It hurts tenants. It creates more notices to vacate in the first year.

It is a disincentive to maintain and improve properties.  I don't think it helps as intended. Appreciate you asking. As an owner I got behind w rent increases and can't afford HVAC repairs now for instance  AB1482
 Tenants taking advantage of the program because they know it is difficult to be removed from properties now.
 Given state laws now, it is no longer needed at city level.  Eviction protection leave us uncollected rent as bad debt. That makes the value of property worse.
 It unfortunately impacts small investors that previously did not do regular rent increases for good tenants. Now they are forced to do at least annual increases that match CPI so that the value of their complex is not impacted.  It presents unnecessary difficulties for property owners.  State Law now has similar and more comprehensive requirements  Rents finally went up to where they should have been in 2005 to where they actually supported the property values and owners could afford to pay the mortgages with the rent they receive. But the world went crazy that rents could spiral out of control - which they can't because they can only rent for what the market will bear and they had not significantly increased anywhere close to what the market required to support pre-mortgage meltdown prices. These rents had been artificially low for decades, and when they finally started to try to match market the landlords got hit even harder with additional restrictions, headaches and costs. What gives. The property owners pay very high property taxes and ridiculously uncontrolled Utilities expenses and undue burdens to build infrastructure and pay for sidewalks that the city lets get destroyed by the trees that they don't properly deal with roots and the property owners are continually forced to deal with city forcing them to pay for new sidewalks, plus the city charges and fines owners for trash and debris dumped by an out of control homeless population, and then to add insult to injury, the cities idea of dealing with the trespassing of homeless criminals littering and defecating on innocent landlords properties, is to issue a fine to the property owner for a crime they did not commit and that they have already being paying to clean up and keep in check. Why does the city hate its landlords? They do in fact support the city.

They pay for most of the city services, yet the city continues to trample all over them. The tenants damage an owners property, and the city will force the owner Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 39 to fix it and then fine them if they don't even when clearly the tenant caused the issue and you know where they live and how to server them - but you are unwilling to do so, because you would rather bully the owner, and then you want to imply that they are criminally overcharging tenants and running away with undeserved fortunes, when in fact they can barley even get tenants to pay rents, because its better politics to protect tenants even when they are not the ones that need protecting.
 It's a bully pulpit for tenants
 State of California has information readily available on line.  Extra work-no benefit to me
 There are other Programs that protect the tenants.
 has given owners more restrictions
 Undecided
 WHAT DO THEY DO FOR US?? NOTHING!
 They already have state rent and eviction control
 Unfair to owners
 This is just another way to get money!
 It should be applied equally to ALL rental properties, and inhibits free market principles
 The only purpose of the TPP has been to harass and harm the property owner.

The City is in control of my property but takes none of the responsibility for problems. In the past, I was happy to keep my rents low and not increase them while that tenant was there. NOW I crank them up as high as the law allows to compensate me for all the harassment, paperwork, and expenses the City has added.
 too much confusion
 seems like a money grab - not sure what they do to make paying them valuable to us as owners
 Owner's shouldn't be forced to pay for the mandatory enrollment which does not serve to protect them. Renters should pay the cost since it benefits them.  The city already has a rental unit inspection program to ensure properly maintained units. There is a court system that is available to tenants and property owners and managers. The TPP is redundant to that system and provides an avenue for tenants that are problematic to fair business interface, and other tenants, to harass managers, owners, and other tenants. It adds cost to providing quality housing in Sacramento by requiring the funding of an unnecessary bureaucracy. It also is unfair to older apartment owners that provide housing to renters of moderate means by charging additional fees not applied to newer more expensive properties. If newer properties can exist without the TPP so can older properties.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 40  I don’t think they help me to work better with my tenants  I am not sure what they do and why I need to pay for it?  Too many limitations for property owners and another fee-based waste of money that goes to a city that does not enforce homelessness issues or thefts.  Added layer of regulation that isn't needed. Adding to the expense for providing houses.
 Intrusive, overprotective of tenants, absolves tenants of responsibilities, forces owners to raise rents when they would prefer to keep rents under-market for good tenants.
 I am a responsible rental property owner, I feel their fees are just another way to tax us
 i really don't know much about if so I don't want to say yes  Charges me money and doesn't do anything useful
 The program makes it very difficult to navigate issues with problem tenants. (behavioral or monetary) Accordingly, I am extremely cautious about who I rent to, and require a very high credit score to qualify. In other words, it is more difficult for renters to find a place to live.
 This program causes rent increases!
 It has changed nothing in the way we do business, yet costs money and requires extra paperwork.
 I had a terrible tenant. He had flooded the unit and another time started a small fire. It was so filthy. He harassed and threatened the other tenant and me. I couldn’t find a property manager to help me because of the TPP. They said there was nothing I could do to get the tenant out. None of the things he was doing was enough to evict him. I don't agree with the TPP's no eviction rule.

Sometimes there are problems that arise that can't be solved except by having the tenant move out. If a 3 month notice was required, that would give the tenants plenty of time.
 no, the provisions are burdensome and anti-landlord
 It protects bad tenants.
 I am a responsible landlord and it has only created extra paperwork and expense for me with no benefit to my tenants.
 I don’t really know.
 My rental property hasn’t made a profit in 2 years
 I do not think this program serves the good residents of the community who comply with their leases. It is nearly impossible to resolve issues from a management standpoint without going through cumbersome steps and extended timeframes, at which point good residents grow frustrated and depart.  Owners pay for tenants to have protection, but who helps the owners Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 41  I treat my tenants as I would want to be treated, which is certainly within these guidelines.
 Tenants are abusing the program to retaliate against some decision they don't like.
 See question 11
 It denies the landlord the ability to ask a tenant to leave unless the tenant is causing problems. The just cause requirements are onerous in that they require two notices during which the tenants can continue to disrupt the premises.  I don't know what they do. I just pay the annual fee.  Property owners are selling at alarming rates. They can't afford the nonsense of keeping bad tenants for below market rent.
 Has not benefitted myself or my residents
 Typical government overreach. Making it more difficult to manage and own properties in Sacramento. It doesn't help good tenants and enables bad ones.  The laws covered in this program are already state laws. Many clients do not appreciate the additional fees. Also many owners are now increasing rents by the maximum amount because they are concerned the rents will be adversely affected in the future.
 There have been more restrictions imposed on property owners causing them to vacate the rental market and sell their property
 There are very similar state laws, this local one is not necessary  it limits landlords to make wise decision regarding their own rental properties and how they manage.
 I am unsure as I only have 2 units and live in the other.  Fraud increased
 The concept of protecting renters is noble yet the administrative follow through of this program for the owner is lacking.
 Ultimately increases cost to tenants
 It's a duplication of bureaucracy, the state rent laws are already adequate  Eliminates rights of owner. Is hard on questionable tenants.  My tenants receive no benefit - I have never raised rents on current tenants prior to this program - for me it's just another tax that provides no perceivable benefit.  I think it is redundant given the improvements in State regulations and the passing of California Tenant Protection Act creating more paperwork with little effective difference.
 The program is just one more expense and control for property owners of older buildings. It is an extra tax on ownership.
 see #11
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 42  I charge market rents, and looking at rent increases over the last 20 years it is not excessive, it was mostly a spike in the last few years to catch up from low years
 Added fee and bureaucracy.
 It is provides a disincentive to own rental property in Sacramento. I am a small long time landlord and have had long term tenants with reasonable rent rates. I am hoping to sell my property due to the just cause eviction restrictions. I am concerned about the cost and difficulty of a nuisance tenant. This act is very anti landlord and I want to move my capital to a locale this is less adversarial.  Discourages availability of rental units and investment that improves property for tenants
 I have no opinion either way however I take umbrage w/the name of the program as if tenants need protection from owners.
 There is already too much Government control of residential properties  Supply and demand resolve themselves without government intervention. We have found owners increasing rents more than they normally would because of the fear of "falling" behind.
 not sure
 It has not yet benefited my enrollment. As an owner of a single property of two units.
 See above
 Makes me want to sell my units for a location that allows me to base rents on market, not city regs.
 You are penalizing small landlords, and it is unfair. If a condo or single-family home is exempt, why is an owner-occupied duplex not exempt?  Just another revenue producer for the City. No benefit to me or my tenants.  Nothing in it for owners.

The following responses are from respondents who indicated that they do not own or manage rental properties in the City or do not own or manage properties covered under the program:
 Every "protection" is for the tenant, nothing for the property owner, who is taking all the risks. The City also seems to take the attitude that tenants are always right and need protection from evil property owners. It is a clear bias, and needs to be addressed.
 this program has not done anything for me.
 Scamming landlords with a program that does not pay.
 Does nothing. My existing agent does all the work.

Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 43  No help for tenants-fear of retaliation-no protections employed for tenants-no support to tenants
 The only people that benefit is the tenant. With the huge increase in costs (inflation), it is so expensive to fix anything. A roof costs $20,000 and up. To renovate a bathroom $25,000. How can landlords make the money they need to live. I only make about $400.00 a unit for my duplex. This is not much considering I manage them too. The City only looks out for who they want to and that is not everyone like they should be.

*Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

0 20
40 60
80 100
120
No Yes
Have you as a property manager or owner
withdrawn rental units from the rental market
as a direct result of the City of Sacramento
Tenant Protection Program? (Applicable
respondents only*)
110
22 3 6 4
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
Not
applicable
2-5 10-30 5-10 30+
If yes, how many units have been removed
from the rental market that you are
directly responsible for? (Applicable
respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 44 *Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

If no, please specify what additional steps could be taken to educate tenants on their existing rights under the law):
 The City will answer this question.
 Educate them on way landlords are forced to raise rents  Educate stakeholders on the negative consequences of such rent control on a community's housing supply over time.
 A PSA in several languages would be helpful
 I believe that all education is good but there must be a balance in educating tenants about their obligations as well as Landlord rights.  The TPP letter to tenants needed updating. Tenants do not know anything about the TPP
 Billboard Ads
 terminate the program.
 I did not even realize there was a website etc until I received a bill.  I feel like tenants are pretty clear on their rights. Owners don't always know their rights.
 It is simply not needed with other tenant protections in place  The city should provide a single page info sheet with links to info that landlords can print and include with rental contracts.
 I think out of area buyers need better disclosure from sellers and agents.  Yes - of course. Everyone wants to make sure they know how they can never have to pay rent and how they can sue the landlords. How about some education on what their responsibilities are as residents of a community. How 62 78
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
Yes No
Do you believe there is adequate education
and public awareness of the Tenant
Protection Program? (Applicable respondents
only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 45 about you write tickets and fines to tenants who are not taking good care of the property, neighborhood, and community that they are residents of.  CANCLE THE PROGRAM!
 The more you punish people for having rentals the less rentals you have witch means higher rents
 Both tenants and property owners do not always know there are separate city rules that need to be followed
 No, the City doesn't want the property owners to know about the problems the City intend to cause for the owner.
 Rather than remove units, we are in the process of selling several 4 plexes via tax deferred exchanges outside California. This does cause a tax burden for the new owners that has to be supported by our good tenants, some that were with us for many years. The climate for providing quality units in Sacramento has become simply to onerous for us.
 No there needs to be more reliable information provided for both tenants and landlords
 More education is always better. If you insist on keeping the program I really suggest you change the rules and scope
 Not sure, limited experience. Not sure how tenants find out??  If the city wants this program they need to reach the tenants by mail, email, publicity, however
 Only the bad tenants understand it and use to enable their behavior and continue to terrorize the neighborhood.
 Require documentation, so tenants committing fraud cease  I do not know anything about it
 Government does not know how to handle private business decisions, and have unintended consequences of rules that make business difficult  see #11
 I don’t know enough on these topics to judge.
 Totally biased towards tenants and not enough education to the public and lawmakers in regards to how the rental industry actually works.  I didn't receive any public education...
 I have no idea as the city is so bad at this
 See, all about the tenants.

The following responses are from respondents who indicated that they do not own or manage rental properties in the City or do not own or manage properties covered under the program:
 Send informational brochures in the mail
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 46  I don’t know as I am not a tenant and I don’t know how they are notified or educated about the program
 individual contact to tenants-door to door-mail-email, etc. to assure tenants of their rights and protections specifically if there is an existing issue with landlord not complying with city, state, county ordinances and laws  Where is the Landlord Protection Program.

*Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

7 64
74 0
20 40
60 80
Not strict enough Just right Too strict
Under both state lawand the City's Tenant
Protection Program, property owners may
not increase rents by more than 5% + CPI,
up to 10%, on an annual basis. Do you
believe this restriction is: (Applicable
respondents only*)
101
38 1
5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Below market rate
At market rate
Above market rate
Unsure
Before the Tenant Protection Program was
put into place do you believe that your
rental unit(s) were below market rate, at
market rate or above market rate?
(Applicable respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 47 Reasons the program impacted decisions on major property improvements:
 If my allowable rent increase is capped it limits the scope and price of capital improvements I am able to perform on my property. This is a long known side effect of rent control, which in reality is what this program actually is.  With increasing insurance and taxes, we can no longer make improvements because we can't raise the income of our business. AKA rents.  Rent control punishes housing suppliers and disincentivizes investing in upgrades.
 The program makes it impossible to make improvements proactively to increase the quality of the property. It actively incentivizes investors to wait for a code violation before making improvements. More importantly, it prevents investors 64 67
8 6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Below market rate
At market rate
Above market rate
Unsure
Now that the program has been in place do
you have your property rented at:
(Applicable respondents only*)
62 25
57 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
No
Unsure
Yes (please explain why)
Since the Tenant Protection Program has
been put into place, have you considered
major property improvements and did the
program impact that decision? (Applicable
respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 48 from purchasing blighted or substandard rental property and improving it to realize a return, keeping minimum or substandard housing in place until the city gets around to enforcement, which is basically never.
 Government sticking their nose between a voluntary exchange between and landlord and a resident disincentivizes improving properties.  This is a 2 part question
 TPA limits a landlord's incentive for expansion or improvement  See response to question #12 above. There are improvements we’d like to do but can’t afford to now.
 in one of my multi unit properties the rents were all below market and trying to catch up with restrictions is tough. Everything has gone up exponentially but we cannot keep up with the rental increase restrictions. It just means we will have to be more diligent about raising rents every year to keep up.  Cannot afford some major improvements I wanted to do.  We have not made the improvements as a result
 We only update units after an existing tenant has given us notice and moved out.

No reason to update/upgrade a unit if we can't get a decent return on the investment which is something government doesn't understand.  I have undertaken major property improvements irrespective of this program.  I am not making improvements if I am not making money to cover them if I am stuck with rents well below market
 I am worried I may not be able to keep rents at market  but weigh the challenges of navigating TPP and AB 1482- too many dollars spent to deal with too many hurdles. rather not spend dollars to improve property, just do the bare, and look for a buyer
 Spending large sums of money to improve properties doesn't make sense if rents cannot be raised
 I manage a community of 14 units where only 3 are part of TPP . This has caused us to give additional review of proposed improvements to the 3 units which are in TPP
 We have owners who have made improvements due to this program.  Property improvements can’t be easily recaptured in rent increases so the law makes neighborhoods worse.
 low rents mean minimal property improvement
 Purchased in 2021, I planned to redo kitchens and baths for energy and water conservation and to remove old carpet. Rental income vs. Fixed expenses can not justify that expense.
 A few clients have wanted to update unit but would have to allow tenant to move back in at same rental rate so did not update
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 49  I just spent $75,000 on my duplex. This included a repair to a failing slab and full remodel
 I can’t do the improvements. Taxes and insurance have sky rocketed. I can’t do projects with rent increase restrictions
 Operating at a loss
 within reason, only when property is vacant
 Program did not impact property improvement decision.  Not worth putting money into the properties
 If major improvements are needed it is harder to recoup costs so need to do improvements over time
 Bad question - there are two questions here. Yes, I have considered improvements. Yes, the program impacted my decision because capped rents means under market income, which means no money for improvements.  Yes, I had considered major property improvements, but why bother? The endless hoops the City has created has stopped me from doing anything. Just keep it as it is and get as much for it as I can.
 Our business model over more than thirty years has been to purchase older buildings that need significant maintenance and upgrades and bring them up to very nice places to live (a place where we would want to live). We then charge the fair market rate to new tenants and do not raise rents to existing tenants above what is needed to maintain the units. That model no longer works in Sacramento's over regulated market, particularly in light of current inflation.  I Can NOT pay for improvements
 improvements we make are much more selective based on need  I am hesitant to invest much money into the place since I can't easily pass "some" of those costs to existing tenants.
 There is no reason to do improvements if you have to offer the unit back to the same tenants at the same rent.
 Landlord restrictions too onerous
 My property experienced water damage as a result of wind damage to the property during major storms. I wanted to immediately repair the property, but the Tenant Program impeded my efforts and caused me a lot of stress.  yes, new roof, but I did not raise my rent.
 Will not aggressively improve the property as long as returns are artificially kept down with policies preventing market rate increases
 cant get your money back in rent
 Why would I fix up a property only to have all these restrictions imposed.

Obviously this law is reducing investor interest in Sacramento, that was Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 50 attempted to be mitigated by exempting properties built after 1995. That doesn't work.
 Property owners no longer have the decision to improve their property until a resident gives notice to vacate, the property owner can no longer improve their property at their free will. Many property owners come into excess funds and want to put that into their rental property, now we must wait until a vacancy to do that. And no, we cannot do major repairs while a tenant is in the property (new flooring, new kitchens or bathrooms)
 due to rent control and materials been expensive it has been difficult to pay for improvements
 I maintain my asset, the program did not impact my upkeep  Knowing the restrictions with rent increases and not being able to catch up to market rates the property has not had any improvements because it does not make financial sense. I have instead decided to invest in areas where there is not restrictions where as a landlord, we update property and have happy long term tenants.
 I made improvements and the TPP did not impact the decision.  Costs of accommodating tenants.
 Reluctant to invest in units and having to go through city bureaucracy to raise rents to compensate for the investment.
 Have considered and chose not to do. The TPP actually makes it less likely for landlords to perform non-essential work due to fear of lawsuit from tenant and/or repercussions from the city. Too much hassle - just keep the unit on market as is and tenants will feel the decline in quality, affordable non-luxury housing stock.  can't raise rents enough for improving the property more  The program only deterred me from taking improvement action  I was going to insulate one of my properties; but decided it was not wise to spend the funds.
 Decided against improvements because Act did not allow me to recoup the costs, particularly curing emergencies like covid
 Improvements were not made due to the stricter requirements that the apartment would have to be offered back a the same rate. And the burdensome requirements that a owner has to go through to be able to start those improvements.
 Rent is so low tenants won't move. The prorated rent is to low for them to get a hotel while renovations are made. I would have to lose 2-3 months of rent to relocate them for two weeks and that's not including the renovation costs.  Some upgrades are needed, but why undertake them if you can't get any return on the investment, or that it will take years to pay for itself.  Scam program that does not pay
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 51  I keep rent low, but this means I only have money to do selective repairs each year
 Never make a major improvement; can't recoup it.

*Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

*Applicable respondents are those who indicated that they own or manage rental properties covered under the Tenant Protection Program.

126
6 13
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
No Yes Unsure
The Tenant Protection Program is designed to
protect tenants. Do you believe that the
program protects property owners as well?
(Applicable respondents only*)
52 68
5 20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Will have no effect
Less likely
More likely
Don't know
If the Tenant Protection Program is renewed,
are you more or less likely to continue
providing your units for rent? (Applicable
respondents only*)
Attachment 4-Tenant Protection Program Survey Results
Tenant Survey Results found on pages 1-33
Property Manager/Owner Survey Results found on pages 33-54 52