Redwood City re-examining renter protection ordinances

“The two ordinances that just went into effect were designed to give tenants more stability and more protections when they are forced to relocate,” Mayor Ian Bain said in an email. “I will be meeting with our staff next week to discuss these ordinances and determine next steps to ensure that they are working as intended.”

Tenants of apartments at 100-150 Duane St., who said they are facing 120 percent to 250 percent rent hikes, believe the ordinances offer no reprieve in their particular situation. They formed a tenants union called Freedonia, organized a rally Monday and shared their stories at a City Council meeting that night.

“With these rent increases, [the landlord] is driving us from our homes while avoiding issuing a formal eviction and paying us relocation benefits according to the relocation assistance ordinance,” Stasha Powell, a tenant at the Duane Street apartment building, said at the Monday meeting. “[The landlord] is exploiting a loophole in the new laws and rent gouging like this is essentially an economic eviction.”

The owner, who purchased the apartment building last year, vehemently disagrees with that assessment.

“A loophole is a preposterous statement. If we wanted to avoid relocation fees, we would’ve served 60-day notices the day after escrow closed last year, before the ordinance existed,” a representative of the owner said, adding that the increase had nothing to do with the minimum lease term ordinance, as was previously stated by some. “We did not make rent increases because of that ordinance. It’s a good ordinance and this whole loophole discussion and blaming the city needs to be clarified. It’s not correct and it’s not right.”

The rent increases were issued because of high property taxes — $100,000 more than what the previous owner paid — and much needed and costly repairs, the representative said.

“We’re empathetic to the tenants and we want them to stay, but with the tax increase and capital improvements and what the building was sold for — there was no way around [the rent hikes],” the representative added. “The one-year lease rate is below-market rate, it’s fair in our opinion and what we can afford to do.”

The rent increase will occur in phases. For Powell, rent will jump from $1,040 per month to $1,700 per month on May 1 and on July 1 it will increase again to $2,300. By Sept. 1, her rent will reach $2,500.

Bain also said the apartment building was in need of repairs, with the cost of that work leading to rent increases.

“In this case, I do not believe the ordinances had anything to do with the rent hikes. These buildings have been in desperate need of repair for a long time and the low rents were reflective of deferred maintenance, “ he said. “The city has been working with the property owners to improve the condition of the property and comply with city codes. That has required the owners to spend money on improvements, and the rent increases are a reflection of that, not the renter protection ordinances.”

Bain said he’s encouraged the owners to work with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center to help mediate the dispute.

But Powell, speaking on behalf of the tenants’ union, wants the city to instate a rent freeze while officials reassess the ordinances and she wants a seat at the table during that process.

Daniel Saver, a lawyer from Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto representing the group, said the city’s relocation assistance ordinance could be improved if it were to include additional triggers for requiring that assistance.

“One of the major problems with the Redwood City version is that the triggers are severely limited,” he said, adding that ordinances passed in Glendale and Santa Cruz, for example, are far more effective than the one on the books in Redwood City. “If a landlord gives a large rent increase or economic eviction and the tenant can’t stay because of the cost — that should trigger relocation assistance.”

That said, Saver argued that only rent stabilization and just cause evictions would provide “meaningful protections” for renters.

Councilwoman Diana Reddy agreed with Saver in so far as the city’s recently adopted renter protection ordinances are insufficient.

“When the council first adopted these protections, I told them that they won’t be able to protect tenants though I applauded the attempt,” she said. “These ordinances give tenants a false sense of security.”

Reddy said she’d like to see the council consider an alternative relocation assistance ordinance that was proposed, but ultimately nixed, in Menlo Park. In that ordinance, relocation benefits would be required for tenants who earn up to 150 percent of the area median income and are facing a rent increase greater than the annual rise in the consumer price index plus 5 percent, according to the Almanac News.

Reddy is interested in tweaking the language of Redwood City’s minimum lease ordinance so rental rates in a one-year lease could only be a certain amount higher than the month-to-month rate, and she also said just cause should be considered.

While the ordinances currently on the books are being assessed, Bain said officials are exploring additional protections for renters.

“Unfortunately, there are many other issues related to rental housing in the Bay Area right now and we are actively looking at what else we can do to protect renters,” he said. “There are several other things that the city is exploring related to helping renters. Our Housing and Human Concerns Committee is taking the lead on this and I expect that they will come to the council with additional recommendations in the coming months.”

zachary@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102