Redwood City stops large rent increases

Assembly Bill 1482, authored by David Chiu, D-San Francisco, was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom Oct. 8. Starting Jan. 1, the bill will prevent landlords from raising rents by more than 5% a year plus inflation. The bill has a retroactive clause that causes all rents to freeze to the level they were on March 15, 2019, so any increase now would be rolled back to that level come Jan. 1 when the law takes effect. The bill also includes just cause protections for tenants who have lived in their unit for 12 months or more. That means a landlord needs a valid reason, such as failure to pay rent, to evict a tenant. 

But none of those protections are in place in Redwood City until Jan. 1.

In anticipation of AB 1482 taking effect, it appears some landlords in the city are attempting to evict tenants so they can avoid the rent caps mandated in the bill. Within the past several weeks, close to 30 Redwood City tenants received 60-day no cause termination notices and others have been hit with rent hikes between 12% and 32%, according to a staff report. Many of those tenants said they could not afford rent increases that high and would be forced to leave their home — what’s known as an economic eviction.

During the meeting Monday, there was roughly two hours of public testimony, largely from Latino renters facing eviction. Numerous members of the Peninsula’s religious community also turned out in support of the urgency ordinance. 

“A few weeks ago, someone knocked on my door and gave me an eviction notice without cause,” said resident Maria Barajas. “This was a surprise to me because we all live there very peacefully, the neighbors are very quiet and I’ve lived there more than 15 years. I have been very nervous since then and feeling a lot of anxiety because I’ve been looking tirelessly and have not been able to find an adequate place.” 

Councilwoman Janet Borgens described such evictions as immoral and said she’s been hearing similar stories for months.

“I’ve received more phone calls in the last four months from residents who are crying because they’re getting eviction notices for no reason. They didn’t negate their contract, they didn’t have subletters, they didn’t have illegal activity, they paid their rent on time, their unit is clean and for no reason they were served with an eviction notice,” she said. “That is an illegal eviction in my mind. It’s an economic eviction. It’s not fair and it’s not moral.”

‘A storm was brewing’

City officials took action soon after receiving reports of evictions and an ordinance was drafted within weeks. Councilmembers hailed the quick turnaround as unprecedented. 

“We took up this issue the moment we heard a storm was brewing,” said Councilwoman Giselle Hale. “This is literally unprecedented in the government space to see something move this quickly, but it was the time.” 

The urgency ordinance will be on the books between Oct. 28 and Dec. 31, effectively implementing AB 1482 in the city two months ahead of schedule. The ordinance caps rent hikes at 9% and makes it illegal to evict a tenant without a just cause.

Councilwoman Diana Reddy said 9% is high, but a step in the right direction. 

“Nine percent is actually pretty high, but a step toward fairness and it’s better than the 20% to 50% rent increases reported last month,” she said, adding that San Jose implemented an 8% rent cap several years ago before lowering it to 5%. “Very few of us are given a 5% to 8% salary increase.”

Buildings constructed less than 15 years ago, condos and single-family homes, unless owned by a corporation or real estate investment trust, will be exempt from both the urgency ordinance and AB 1482.

Opposition

While the vast majority of speakers during public comment supported the urgency ordinance, it also had its critics. 

Joshua Howard, spokesman for the California Apartment Association, questioned the necessity of the proposal given Newsom on Oct. 26 declared a state of emergency, which caps rent increases at 10% in California, because of the wildfires. 

But a state of emergency only spans 30 days, though it can be extended, and does not protect tenants who received eviction notices before it was declared. 

Howard also suggested the city did not adequately engage the community before proposing the new rules, which he described as a costly effort. 

“There’s a lot of need here for outreach, there’s a lot of need for education,” he said. “The staff has even expressed the challenges of costs associated with trying to implement these two ordinances just for the next 60 days.” 

That last point was echoed by some councilmembers, though they didn’t see it as cause to reject the ordinance.

“Other affordable housing initiatives we had planned to work on will be tabled so we can take this on,” Hale said. “There’s always a tradeoff, there’s always a cost.” 

A representative from the San Mateo County Association of Realtors also reminded the council that it has historically been opposed to rent control, though councilmembers said the urgency ordinance does not qualify. 

“I always had concerns about rent control, especially enacted on a local level. I don’t see this as rent control,” said Mayor Ian Bain. 

Frustrations

While seemingly supportive of AB 1482, councilmembers described the bill as flawed and were frustrated that an urgency ordinance was necessary. 

“This is a well documented impact of rent stabilization that rents increase before this goes into effect,” Hale said. “The state did not prepare for this and cities are left to finish the job.”

On Oct. 14, after hearing about the evictions in Redwood City, Chiu sent a letter to the council urging it to pass an urgency ordinance. Bain said he was “taken aback” when he received it. 

“I support AB 1482, but have to admit I was a bit taken aback when I got a letter form the author of AB 1482 basically saying we’ve just passed this state law, now we need you to pass an urgency ordinance to fix the loophole in the law we just passed,” he said. “I’ve never seen that in the 17 years I’ve been on the council.” 

Other San Mateo County cities have and may soon have urgency ordinances on the books. Daly City passed one the same night as Redwood City. On Nov. 4, San Mateo will consider an urgency ordinance and Foster City is tentatively set to do the same on Nov. 18. 

In other business, councilmembers expressed interest in banning sales of flavored tobacco products, with some calling for an ordinance even more restrictive than the one passed by San Mateo County last year. 

zachary@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102

Note to readers: This story has been changed to correct the name of the organization represented by Joshua Howard. It is the California Apartment Association.