►
From YouTube: January 24, 2022 Rental Housing Committee Meeting
Description
Live teleconference meeting of the Mountain View Rental Housing Committee Meeting scheduled for Monday, January 24, 2022.
Live Video Conference: YouTube, mountainview.legistar.com, and Comcast Channel 26.
A
A
67
petitions
have
gone
through
the
full
adjudication
process,
with
15
being
decided
on
appeal
and
the
average
duration
from
acceptance
to
the
settlement
or
hearing
decision
being
served
is
91
days,
so
they
are
pretty
efficient
in
this
process.
At
this
point
and
with
that
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
bring
them
into
the.
A
B
I
have
been
in
alternative
dispute
resolution
since
1998.
Prior
to
that
I
went
to
law
school
at
stanford
and
I
was
a
lawyer
for
a
few
years
and
then
I
went
into
legal
education.
I
was
a
professor
of
law
at
golden
gate
law
school
in
san
francisco
for
10
years,
and
so
in
1998
I
started
doing
arbitration
and
then
in
2004
I
decided
to
devote
myself
to
a
full-time
adr
practice
and
I
started
doing
mediation
also,
and
my
experience
is
pretty
broad,
I'm
on
a
number
of
panels-
I've.
C
Sure,
as
long
as
barbara
gets
to
go
first
and
the
pressure's
off
good
evening,
ladies
and
gentlemen
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
derek
chantler.
I
am
an
attorney,
but
don't
hold
that
against
me.
I
have
the
pleasure
of
working
with
your
city,
we're
serving
as
a
hearing
examiner
under
your
ordinance
and
several
other
ordinances
around
in
the
bay
area
as
well.
Last
count.
I
think
it
was
five
that
we
work
with.
So
I'm
a
little
bit
behind
some
of
the
others.
I
guess
but
I'll
catch
up.
C
D
Hi,
I'm
sandra
de
la
tour,
and
I
have
been
an
attorney
for
a
very
long
time
and
I
got
introduced
to
mediation
many
years
ago
and
really
thought
it
was
a
wonderful
option
and
eventually
developed
an
abr
practice
somewhere
along
the
way.
I
also
was
working
as
staff
for
project
sentinel
and
got
a
really
good
idea
of
some
of
these
programs.
D
E
All
right,
good
evening,
everybody
I'm
martin
eichner.
I
was
in
private
practice
for
a
number
of
years,
but
in
2001
I
left
practice
and
became
the
director
of
dispute
resolution
programs
for
project
sentinel.
I
held
that
position
for
about
13
years
and
then
left
the
agency
to
go
out
on
my
own.
I've
been
doing
mediation
and
arbitration
and
hearing
officer
work
since
then.
E
I'm
currently
on
the
list
for
about
seven
different
cities.
Most
of
us
are
part
of
the
same
panels
for
all
of
the
cities,
but
I
also
helped
when
I
was
around
at
least
when
the
csfr
first
began
functioning,
and
I
did
some
of
the
original
community
outreach
presentations,
trying
to
explain
the
ordinance
to
the
public.
A
G
G
D
Well,
one
of
the
reasons
why
I
like
to
do
this
kind
of
work
is,
I
feel,
like
we
are
helping
people
get
through
difficult
times
in
a
fairly
timely
way.
They
don't
have
to
wait
for
months
or
years
for
resolution
and
especially
with
housing.
That's
critical
and
I
also
enjoy
working
with
the
people
out
outside
of
the
adversarial
system,
somewhat
like
what
martin
said,
people
sort
of
change
who
they
are
as
they
go
through
litigation
that
adversarial
system
doesn't
really
help
people
get
along.
B
I
think
another
important
aspect
of
these
programs
is
that
they
give
the
participants
an
opportunity
to
be
heard.
I
think
that
they
feel
very
strongly
that
that
they
need
to
express
their
to
to
explain
their
experience
and
to
have
someone
listen
to
what
they
have
to
say,
and
we
can
do
that
without
all
of
the
formality
of
a
court
where
a
lot
of
the
times
you
don't
come
out
of
it
feeling,
like
you've,
been
heard
because
of
all
of
the
evidentiary
rules
that
are
of
necessity
applied.
B
E
And
if
I,
if
I
may,
I
let
me
just
add
one
more
important
thought
is
that
litigation
is
extremely
expensive
and
most
citizens
can't
afford
to
hire
an
attorney
and
pay
the
expenses
of
a
lawsuit
which
can
be
extremely
high
and
in
a
program
like
this,
gives
it
people
a
chance
to
participate
without
that
kind
of
expense
or
that
kind
of
financial
burden
facing
them.
And
even
if
they
win,
the
financial
burden
can
be
overwhelming.
And
this
program
is
a
whole
alternative
way
for
people
to
bring
their
disputes
forward
and
get
them
resolved.
H
I
You
go
now,
oh
great
hi.
I
have
a
lot
of
questions
so
feel
free
to
write
them
down,
as
I
I'm
going
to
put
them
all
out
there.
So
you
can
choose
how
you
want
to
answer
them
all
together.
So
the
first
question
I
have
are
any
of
you
bilingual
and
have
you
had
mediations
or
hearings
that
needed
a
bilingual
component
and
we're
going
to
broaden
out
to
other
accessibility
factors?
I
C
C
My
experience
is
they're.
All
very
professional
we've
had
spanish
we've
had
chinese
and
sorry
mandarin
is
a
form
of
chinese
and
one
other
asian
language
which
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
don't
actually
remember,
but
it's
come
through
fairly
well.
Everything
they
translate,
of
course,
is
in
the
recording
or
the
written
transcript
so
that
somebody
can
go
along
later
on
who
has
more
intelligence
than
I
do
and
make
sure
that
what
they
actually
translated
was
what
was
actually
said.
E
They
understand
the
legal
terminology
and
they're
very
good
at
that
instantaneously
and
accurately
translating,
but
even
more
importantly,
it
means
that
all
the
parties
hear
the
same
translation,
and
so
you
want,
regardless
of
what
language
you're
speaking
in
you
want
someone
to
convert
that
to
the
language
that
everyone
in
in
the
hearing
or
everyone
on
the
zoom
conference
can
hear
equally,
and
that
requires
a
a
separate
person
than
the
hearing
officer
or
anyone
else.
Who's
involved
in
the
administration.
D
D
A
Staff
would
like
to
mention
that
we
have
a
formal
process
in
place
for
this.
If
the
need
is
present
presented
to
to
staff
and
the
hearing
officer
during
the
petition
process,
we
actually
had
a
petition
hearing
this
past
last
week
that
was
continuously
translated
for
a
spanish-speaking
community
for
members
of
the
parties
that
required
that
service.
D
In
response
to
other
kinds
of
accessibilities,
I
haven't
faced
much
many
requests
at
this
point
for
other
types
of
accessibility,
but
I'm
sure
we
have
processes
in
place
for
that
as
well,
because
there
are
alternatives.
Now
that
we
are,
we
can
do
meetings
on
zoom
as
well.
As
you
know,
we
we
used
to
do
them
in
person.
D
J
I
just
I'm
curious,
you
know
when
working
with
a
committee
such
as
ours,
we
have
the
ability
to
remand
the
decision
and
also
to
modify
the
decision,
and
if
my
question
is
too
dangerous
to
answer
completely
understand.
But
what
are
your
general
feelings
in
terms
of
a
body
such
as
ours,
in
terms
of,
should
we
generally
remand
or
modify
decisions,
or
is
it
really
case
by
case
in
your
own
view,.
K
C
C
C
You
know
you
might
have
missed
this
and
send
it
back
to
me
to
say:
hey
did
you
think
about
this,
and
maybe
I
did
think
about
it
and
didn't
write
it
down
in
the
decision
and
maybe
it's
something
brand
new
that
a
new
set
of
eyes,
looking
at
the
facts
of
the
case,
has
identified
that
I
haven't.
So
that's
the
the
good
side
of
things.
D
D
You
know
to
have
a
particular
fact
involved
where
it
didn't
hit
the
hearing
officer.
That
way.
So
again,
I
agree
it's
good
to
have
another
set
of
eyes
and
opinions,
but
as
a
hearing
officer,
I
appreciate
the
chance
to
try
to
modify
my
own
decision,
but
we
would
accept
whatever
you
choose
to
do.
Of
course,.
J
Well,
thank
you
both.
I
really
appreciate
that
input.
I
was
more
just
curious
from
my
own
sort
of
edification
and
as
we
go
through
our
appeals,
thinking
about
you
know
a
lot
of
times.
I
feel
like
at
least
personally
I'm
in
the
well.
We
could
remand
or
we
could
modify.
You
know
pros
and
cons
of
each.
So
it's
interested
to
hear
your
opinions
on
that.
Thank
you.
L
L
L
M
G
L
L
A
Good
evening,
thank
you,
chair
almond
item
7.2
is
our
monthly
reports
and
we're
going
to
go
over
these
relatively
quickly
this
evening,
since
our
agenda
is
so
very
full.
So
the
first
one
that
we'll
review
this
evening
is
our
rent
stabilization
program,
monthly
status
report
for
the
fiscal
year
2021-22
as
of
december
2021
for
community
outreach
and
education,
we've
had
1295
public
inquiries
made,
547
of
which
were
requesting
bilingual
services
with
spanish
as
a
primary
language,
and
the
bulk
of
that
right
now
is
for
covid
rent
relief.
A
Here
you'll
see
our
workshops
and
trainings
office
hours
and
events.
We
are
holding
eviction,
help
center
clinics
pretty
much
every
twice
a
week
once
on
tuesdays
and
once
on
thursdays
and
then
as
needed
for
people
who
need
additional
support.
These
have
gone
fully
virtual
to
deal
with
the
omicron
surge.
We
are
no
longer
at
the
library
during
this
high
risk
time
and
the
services
will
continue
to
be
virtual
until
for
the
first
for
for
the
foreseeable
future
and
until
the
case
rates
do
decline,
we
have
not
seen
much
of
a
drop
in
attendance.
A
However,
it
is
so
very,
very
busy
at
the
eviction
help
center
and
right
now,
we've
had
quite
a
big
jump
in
attendees
at
575
attendees
for
our
eviction
help
center
clinics
and
pop-ups.
Since
the
start
of
the
fiscal
year,
we've
provided
five
mass
mailings
and
375
targeted
letters.
So
every
time
we
receive
a
termination
notice
from
a
property
owner,
we
are
following
that
up
with
courtesy
letters
to
the
property
owner
and
to
the
tenant.
A
This
number
reflects
just
the
tenant
outreach
and
the
targeted
letters
include
our
eviction
help
center
flyers,
as
well
as
a
four-step
eviction.
Prevention
info
sheet,
we
have
also
placed
18
mountain
view,
voice
ads
specifically
mostly
focused
on
the
eviction
help
center
and
on
the
rent
relief
webinars.
This
fiscal
year
we've
had
a
72,
mediations
and
conciliations
through
the
mountain
view,
mediation
program,
57
of
which
have
already
been
resolved
with
14
pending
and
again
the
mountain
view.
Mediation
program
provides
mediation
services
through
the
city
of
mountain
view.
A
A
As
you
can
see
here,
this
is
the
total
breakdown
of
termination
submittals,
as
received
by
the
city,
and
we
have
not
seen
a
significant
increase
or
decrease
in
failure
to
pay
rent
notices
for
the
past
year,
and
this
holds
true
aside
from
the
time
when
the
eviction
moratorium
was
fully
in
place.
These
numbers
are
averaging
out
to
be
very
similar
to
what
we
saw
before
the
pandemics.
So
I
do
want
to
highlight
that.
A
A
So
we
have
one
landlord
petition,
that's
related
to
an
mnoi
upward
adjustment
of
rent
and
one
landlord
petition
that
is
separate
and
not
petition.
Related
upward
adjustment
of
rent
petition
related
petition
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
clear
as
possible
for
the
market
conditions
fully
covered
units
are
at
6.9
percent
vacancy
and
that's
very
close
to
what
we're
seeing
for
a
fully
covered
unit.
Newly
built
units
are
all
the
way
up
at
10.3
percent,
but
that
is
dropping
and
partially
covered
units
are
at
four
percent.
A
So
we
are
seeing
market
recovery
across
the
board
for
rent
rent
is
increasing
once
again
full
of
fully
covered
units,
it's
up
to
2525
dollars
on
average
for
market
rent
and
since
the
start
of
the
tracking
that
we
do
here
going
all
the
way
back.
Looking
at
2009
10
fiscal
year,
that's
a
54.8
percent
increase
in
price.
A
So
I
do
want
to
mention
that
the
reason
why
we
take
a
look
back
that
far
is
to
show
what's
happened
during
the
great
recession
to
the
market
and
how
that
was
affected
and
then
how
it
has
rebounded
over
time
and
for
properties
sold.
We
have
12
properties
that
have
been
sold
this
year,
that
are
csa
fully
cut,
csfra
fully
covered
units
and
for
a
total
of
116
units.
A
And
those
letters
have
everything
provided
in
english,
spanish,
mandarin
and
russian,
so
when
we
send
them
out,
we
send
out
quite
a
little
packet
with
all
of
those
languages
included
and
for
reporting
purposes.
I
do
want
to
mention
that
there
is
a
change
in
the
number
related
to
the
primary
language
being
spoken
or
requested
in
spanish.
For
this
report
there
was
an
error.
It
was
being
reported
monthly
in
the
previous
reports
and
this
one
is
corrected
and
up
to
date
as
the
actual
fiscal
year
total.
So
please
note
that.
A
A
As
I
mentioned
earlier,
the
eviction
prevention
program
has
been
very
busy.
We
have
held
24
clinics,
including
two
pop-up
events,
and
when
I
speak
about
pop-up
events
and
when
we're
talking
about
the
numbers
here
for
the
eviction
prevention
program
and
the
eviction
health
center,
you
will
see
slight
discrepancies
in
the
numbers
and
that's
because
we're
talking
about
slightly
different
things.
For
this
particular
part.
This
is
the
eviction
help
center
pop-up
events
where
we
were
actually
helping.
A
People
apply
for
rent
relief
before
we
opened
the
actual
formal
eviction
help
center
clinic,
so
there
have
been
24
clinics
held
representing
313,
tenants
and
four
landlords,
and
we've
been
able
to
assist
203
individual
households
with
applying
for
state
rent
relief
at
the
city's
eviction
health
center
and
we've
assisted
in
some
capacity
317
total
clients.
So
this
this
number
also
shows
the
number
of
people
who
are
coming
in
repeatedly
for
follow-up
assistance.
So
the
203
is
the
individual
households
and
the
317
represents
how
many
people
we
see
in
total.
A
A
89
percent
of
our
clients
heard
about
the
services
through
the
community,
including
through
our
community
organizations
through
each
household,
has
a
majority
of
three
or
more
people
at
71
percent
living
in
their
household
and
on
average,
the
households
are
making
less
than
25
25
000
annually
for
the
entire
household.
So
that's
55
of
the
households
that
were
seen
make
less
than
25
000
a
year.
A
That's
the
one
that's
administered
on
behalf
of
the
city
through
csa,
they've
received
2.3
months
of
assistance
from
the
city
for
rent
relief,
18
received
termination
notices
and
on
average
people
are
1.4
months
behind
on
their
rent
and
46.
Clients
have
requested
and
received
legal
assistance
through
the
program,
and
there
was
a
question
about
this
number.
There
was
a
data
discrepancy
issue
and
we
have
adjusted
it
to
be
to
reflect
the
number
of
people
that
have
been
actually
referred
to
and
received
legal
assistance
in
the
program.
So
that's
why
the
number
is
higher.
A
A
A
The
postcards
have
reached
36,
000
households
and
655
landlords,
and
then
finally,
this
is
some
of
our
detailed,
multimodal
multilingual
communications.
We
have
three
web
pages
in
three
languages
related
to
the
eviction,
help
center
and
eviction
protection
programs,
two
informational
flyers,
one
short
video,
a
fillable
form
and
we've
had
18
weekly
mountain
view,
voice
ads
one
press
release,
three
news:
media
coverage
opportunities,
including
one
in
spanish
and
four
social
media
posts,
have
gone
out
and
then,
finally,
this
is
the
termination
notices
that
we've
already
discussed
this
evening.
A
I
I
A
Stanford
law
clinic
and
cluster
are
working
with
us
and
attending
every
virtual
clinic
in
some
capacity
they
off
they
rotate
weeks.
So
one
week
we
have
the
stanford
law
clinic
and
one
week
we
have
class
and
they
provide
services
just
like
they
were
providing
before
the
end
of
the
calendar
year,
they're
all
pro
bono
and
they
are
providing
assistance
to
the
community.
A
The
commitment
from
from
them
is
continuous,
until
otherwise
noted
from
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge,
wonderful,
thank
you
and
before
before
we
went
fully
virtual
this,
I
believe
it
was
the
stanford
law
clinic
that
they've
been
virtual
this
entire
time.
So
I
don't
know
the
other
way
around
andrea
klusko
was.
J
M
J
G
I
think
you
answered
the
question,
but
I
just
want
to.
I
just
want
you
to
please
clarify
for
me:
did
you
say
that,
in
order
for
us
for
community
members
to
access
this
service
is
the
reserve?
Is
it
automatically
referred
to
class,
but
in
the
law,
east
palo
alto,
classifying
with
in
the
other
legal
law
clinic?
Thank
you,
stanford
law
clinic
for.
L
L
L
L
H
P
Excellent,
actually
very
detailed
information
thanks
for
providing
that
not
so
much
comments
as
questions,
but
last
year
there
was,
I
think,
40
000
allocated
toward
eviction
protection
program.
I
like
to
see
how
that
money
was
spent
and
and
if
it
was
actually
used
or
not,
because
I
think
if
you
remember
correctly,
I
was
adamant
like
it's
a
waste
of
money,
so
I'd
like
to
see
that
detailed
on
how
that
was
spent.
P
H
Q
I
guess
there
isn't
one.
The
last
slide
that
was
shown
in
the
report
had
an
item
under
eviction
snowf
or
it
was
not
no
fault
but
fault
evictions,
and
there
was
an
item
that
said
nuisance
and
it
occurred
to
me
that
landlords
could
decide
that
an
attendant
was
creating
a
nuisance.
And
how
does
that
get.
Q
N
A
So
the
purpose
of
this
item
is
just
to
review
and
adopt
the
chapter
8
regulations
which
discuss
the
procedures
for
annual
general
adjustments
and
banking
and
also
outline
tenant,
hardship
conditions
and
then
to
also
review
and
adopt
a
chapter
nine
of
the
mhrso
regulations
which
discuss
new
and
additional
occupants
next
slide.
Please
so
as
a
reminder,
the
goal
of
the
ordinance
is
to
stabilize
rents
for
mobile
home
owners
and
mobile
home
tenants,
while
providing
mobile
home
park
owners
and
mobile
home
landlords
with
a
fair
rate
of
return.
A
So
again,
the
authority,
the
the
ordinance
itself,
provides
the
rental
housing
committee
has
the
authority
to
establish
rules
and
regulations
for
administration
and
enforcement
of
the
ordinance
next
slide.
Please
so,
starting
with
chapter
eight,
which
talks
about
banking
and
tenant
hardship,
the
mobile
home
ordinance
as
the
similar
to
the
csfra
allows
a
park
owner
or
mobile
home
landlord
to
bank
rent
increases
that
are
not
imposed
in
a
given
year
and
to
impose
those
increases
in
subsequent
subsequent
years
for
a
maximum
of
a
ten
percent
increase
in
one
year.
A
Next
slide,
please
so
chapter
eight
of
the
ordinance
regulations
would
clarify
the
banking
procedures.
Specifically,
it
would
require
a
park
owner
or
a
mobile
home
landlord
who
wants
to
bank
an
increase
to
provide
or
to
impose
rather
a
banked
increase,
to
provide
notice
to
the
mobile
home
owner
or
mobile
home
tenant.
That
includes
the
dollar
and
percentage
amount
of
the
requested
increase,
as
well
as
information
about
bank
increases
and
the
right
of
the
mobile
home
owner
or
mobile
home
tenant
to
file
a
hardship
petition
next
slide.
A
So
chapter
9
of
the
regulations
build
on
the
just
cause.
For
eviction,
regulations
that
I
believe
were
adopted
at
the
last
meeting,
the
mobile
home
ordinance
provides
that
a
mobile
home
landlord
may
not
terminate
a
tenancy
based
on
subleasing.
If
the
sublessee
is
either
replacing
one
or
more
departed
tenants
or
is
an
eligible
member
of
the
mobile
home
tenant
household,
and
that
includes
a
spouse
or
domestic
partner,
children,
parents
and
grandparents
next
slide
so
chapter.
Nine
of
the
regulations
would
clarify
the
process
for
housing.
A
And
then
the
landlord
has
the
ability
to
request
documentation
bearing
verifying
that
relationship
and
the
regulations
would
require
the
tenant
to
provide
that
documentation
to
the
landlord
next
slide.
And
then
the
regulations
also
clarify
the
process
for
replacing
a
departing
roommate
or
a
departing
tenant.
A
So
again,
the
tenant
must
provide
the
landlord
with
notice,
including
the
person's
name
and
the
proposed
terms
of
payment
of
rent,
either
between
the
mobile
home
tenant
and
the
sub
lessee,
or
between
the
landlord
and
the
sub
lassie,
and
then
the
mobile
home
landlord
can
screen
the
roommate
or
the
incoming
tenant
and
charge
a
screening
fee.
However,
the
screening
process
and
criteria
that
they
use
must
be
the
same
process
and
criteria
that
they
use
for
any
tenant.
A
I
Getting
all
active
today
so
thank
you
for
all
the
pre
answers
that
we
set
with
our
former
questions
that
we
sent
before
I
think
in
following
up
in
one
of
them.
I
asked
about
the
criteria
for
for
what
can
be
determined
as
a
hardship
and
one
of
the
answers
was.
It
was
recommended
that
we
would
have
the
same
that
we
have
for
apartments
as
mobile
homes.
A
A
N
A
Not
quite
this
is
a
situation
where
the
master
tenant
is
still
on
the
lease
but
doesn't
reside
in
the
mobile
home.
So
it's
not
necessarily
a
new
lease,
but
if
a
new
lease
were
signed,
then
it
would
be
subject
to
the
vacancy
control
rules
that
are
in
well.
Actually
I
don't
know
that
there
is
vacancy
control
for
for
the
mobile
homes
themselves.
It's
only
for
the
spaces,
so
the
so
and
the
the
just
cause
regulations
apply
only
to
mobile
home
tendencies,
not
mobile
home
space,
tenancies.
R
L
H
H
S
S
I
I
haven't
read
all
the
the
details,
so
I'm
not
up
to
speed
on
all
the
nuances.
So
what
I'm
about
to
say
may
already
be
addressed,
but
to
me
the
whole
the
whole
concept
of
banking
is
it's
not
a
case
where
you
you
either
use
it
or
you
lose
it.
It's
a
case
for
the
landlord
where
they
either
use
it
or
they
pocket
the
increase
or
carry
the
increase
forward,
and
one
of
the
main
goals
of
the
csfra
is
to
create
stability
and
rent
increases
and
minimize
volatility
of
the
rental
increases.
S
So
what
what
the
rental
families
are
experiencing
in
mountain
view,
there's
200
families
roughly
is
typically
what
happens
is
the
landlord
will
present
people
with
a
one-year
six-month
or
month-to-month
lease,
and
I
anticipate
that
the
month-to-month
lease
will
go
up
to
the
equivalent
of
the
aga
and
a
one
year
and
six
month
will
be
less
than
that
amount
in
order
to
provide
an
incentive
to
the
tenant
to
stay
in
their
unit
longer.
So
my
question
is
or
my
comment
is.
S
So
I'd
like
the
team
to
address
that
and
make
sure
something
like
that
doesn't
happen
because
it
just
it
just
goes
against
the
goal
of
the
ordinance,
which
is
to
create
stability
and
rents,
and
it's
also
good
for
the
landlord
because
they
want
people
to
stay
in
their
units.
It's
better
to
keep
somebody
in
your
unit
for
a
year
than
on
a
month-to-month
lease.
So
that's
my
comment
and
I
hope
you
guys
can
address
it
thanks.
So
much.
T
Hell
I'd
like
to
echo
what
my
ally
said.
I
think
that
one
solution
to
this
might
be
to
require
that
mobile
home
landlords
and
park
owners
register
any
proposed
updates
to
the
lease
or
propose
lease
addenda
as
part
of
the
right
registry,
so
that
there's
a
record
of
the
offered
terms
in
case
of
banking,
so
that
it
it's
clear
when
the
banking
is
applied.
What
terms
were
negotiated
in
the
process
of
getting
to
that
point?
O
U
U
U
So
we
have
all
that
information
and
we
can
take
that
into
account
and
get
the
big
picture
of
things.
Just
to
kind
of
you
know
be
really
transparent
with
everything
and
removing
income
on
considering
the
other
options,
I
think
would
be
important
as
well
means
testing
doesn't
always
work
a
lot
of
times.
There's
and
that's
like
another
issue
means
testing.
I
would
like
to
see
addressed
to
kind
of
help
those
people
who
possibly
wouldn't
fit
into
that,
but
would
need
the
help
just
the
same.
U
L
V
F
W
Hey
yeah,
I
raised
my
hand
before,
and
I
know
it
because
edie
and
anna
pretty
much
stated
my
objections
to
always
having
low
income,
be
part
of
the
heart
case.
That's
not
necessarily
the
case.
I
would
like
to
see
that
removed
and
I
just
want
a
second
part
hannah
and
petey
mentioned
about
that.
Thank
you.
K
K
P
Yeah,
I'm
gonna
probably
provide
the
flip
side
comments
of
this.
Basically
by
eliminating
or
putting
handcuffs
on
the
banking
provisions.
You're
basically
saying
the
tenants
are
gonna
get
a
raise
every
year,
regardless
no
one's
ever
going
to
get
a
break
nothing's
ever
going
to
be
banked.
If
you
make
it
difficult
to
exercise
the
heart
you
know,
and
to
use
that
banking
and
tenants
exercise,
hardship,
realities,
nothing's
ever
going
to
get
banked
intents
are
going
to
get
an
increase
every
year.
If
that's,
what
tenants
want
so
be
it?
I
suggest
you,
you
know
it
worse.
P
L
L
I
I
So
after
I
got
the
staff's
answer
from
the
question
beforehand,
I
I
looked
up
the
meeting
where
we
determined
the
criteria
for
the
tenant,
hardships
and
the
criteria
as
it
stands
is:
there's
there's
one
criteria,
which
is
an
income
one.
You
could
even
look
at
the
slides,
the
slides
don't
get
as
specific
as
what
we
are
passing,
but
but
the
criteria
it
currently
stands
at
the
there's,
a
basic
just,
an
income
criteria.
I
Ill
person
with
disability
other
extenuating
circumstances.
Those
currently
also
have
an
income
requirement
with
them,
and
so
I
I
managed
to
look
back
to
where
we
actually
did
the
original
criteria
for
apartments.
When
we
first
did
this,
it
was
so
long
ago.
It
was
really
quite
a
blast
from
the
past.
Okay,
it
was
only
committee
grunwald
and
I
were
the
only
ones
that
were
there
at
that
meeting.
I
That
is
still
a
hardship,
no
matter
what
income
you
have,
if
you
are
terminally,
ill
and
immediately
dying
soon.
That
is
a
hardship
regardless
of
your
income.
If
you
have
a
disability-
and
these
are
one
of
the
few
apartments
that
can
handle
your
disability,
for
example-
it
you-
you
have
a
wheelchair
and
you
need
wheelchair
access,
and
these
are
one
of
the
few
apartments
that
have
it.
I
I
actually
even
be
willing
to
raise
that
just
even
slightly
to
120
ami,
because
rents
are
still
expensive
and
also
the
but
have
the
other
criteria.
The
dependent
minor
children,
elderly
disability
terminally
ill
to
remove
the
income
requirement
on
being
able
to
file
that
hardship,
and
this
is
just
allowing
them
to
file
a
hardship
petition.
I
It's
going
to
be
up
to
the
hearing
officer
to
determine
how
that
gets
shuffled
out,
and
I
don't
talk
about
this
often,
but
I
faced
a
landlord
filing
petition
for
my
apartment,
complex
earlier
on
in
my
my
term
at
the
rhc,
and
we
did
have
people
able
to
file
hardship
petitions.
I
did
not
file
a
hardship
petition
myself,
because
I
was
terrified
to
do
so.
That
is
other
issues,
but
all
it
did
was.
I
My
understanding
is
that
the
people
who
filed
hardship
petitions
were
able
to
they
they
adjusted
who
paid
what
based
on
those
hardship
petitions.
So
my
understanding
is
that
the
agreement
was
we
would
get
10
increases
for
two
years
each,
but
those
who
filed
hardship,
petitions
filed
got
five
percent
increases
for
each
of
those
each
year
for
two
years,
and
I
I
don't
want
to
limit
those
if
they
need
help
be
giving
the
the
hearing
officer
the
flexibility
to
do
that.
I
N
I
just
want
to
clarify-
maybe
that's
not
clear
enough-
that
this
is
just
to
assess
whether
these
households
have
enough
income
to
pay
a
rent
increase
if
that's
banked.
So
sometimes,
if
people
have
a
very
high
income,
they
could
still
have
minor
children
and
there
should
be
no
income
testing
for
them
to
fight
a
hardship.
I
I'm
just
trying
to
understand.
I
N
A
Staff
would
like
to
provide
a
little
a
little
clarification
in
there
as
well
for
the
for
the
hardship
petitions
that
are
filed
in
relationship
to
a
landlord
petition.
It's
one.
Typically,
one
of
the
considerations
used
in
the
final
decision
for
the
overall
petition
for
tenant
hardship,
petitions
that
are
filed
in
relationship
to
a
bank's
rent
increase.
A
The
criteria
is
typically
very
strictly
applied
by
the
hearing
officer,
not
one
of
not
considered
as
one
of
the
considerations
in
a
petition.
It
is
the
consideration
in
the
petition,
so
those
are
they're
slightly
different
in
how
they're
utilized
in
the
petition
process,
because
essentially
they're
different
types
of
petitions.
A
One
is
a
tenant
coming
to
the
city
saying
I've
received
this
banked,
rent
increase
and
I'm
filing
the
petition
against
this
banked.
Rent
increase
and
the
other
is
a
landlord
has
filed
this
petition
against
me
and
I'm
responding
to
the
petition
with
this
other
petition.
So
hopefully
that
provides
some
clarification
as
to
how
they're
adjudicated
it
is
adjudicated
and
utilized
differently.
I
If
I
could
ask
for
some
ques
I'm
so
sorry
if
I
share
haines
lucy,
but
they
just
will
have
some
clarification
while
still
fresh
in
my
head.
So
currently,
if
a
tenant
receives
a
notification
that
they
will
get,
that
there
were
increases
that
were
banked
and
they
got
a
notification
we're
using
the
bank.
Now
they
can
still
file
a
hardship
petition
on
it,
even
if
they,
if
they
make
over
120
ami
but
they're
terminally
ill.
A
No,
that's
where
the
means
testing,
the
120
ami
and
the
criteria
that
are
in
place
come
into
into
play,
so
that
is
what
is
utilized
by
the
hearing
officer
to
determine
whether
or
not
a
hardship
petition
is
accepted
by
this
is
decided
upon
in
a
positive
fashion
for
the
petitioner
yeah.
So
those
criteria
are
what
the
hearing
officer
used
to
determine
the
outcome
of
the
petition,
so
100
percent,
ami
or
fit
or
50
of
your
rent
is
paid
of
your
of
your
income
is
paid
toward
rent.
A
It
could
be
argued
that
someone
in
that
circumstance
could
request
the
other
extenuating
circumstances,
caveat
that
is
allowed
in
the
petition,
and
that
would
then
be
more
up
to
the
hearing
officer
to
determine
so
there
it.
The
hearing
officer's
discretion
is
always
there.
However,
the
criteria
do
provide
them
with
a
an
opportunity
to
more
quickly
and
easily
adjudicate
the
petition.
J
Okay,
so
before
I
move,
I
have
two
things
but
to
stay
on
this
one.
First,
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
staff
say
is
that
if
I
receive
a
banked
increase,
let's
say
I
am
a
hypothetical
tenant
and
I
make
120
of
ami
or
less
or
if
rent
will
be
50
or
more
of
my
income,
and
I
have
a
dependent,
minor
child
or
end
I'm
over
62
or
end
I'm
a
person
with
a
disability
or
end
I'm
a
person
with
a
terminal
illness.
J
I
am
almost,
I
don't
want
to
say
guaranteed,
because
there
are
no
guarantees
in
life,
but
it
is
incredibly
highly
probable
that
my
petition
will
prevail
without
much
of
a
legal
review.
So
I
think,
if
we're
saying
we'd
like
to
take
a
means
test
off
of
something
I
think
where
we
take
it
off,
is
the
extenuating
circumstances
item
and
we
allow
that
to
be
the
catch-all.
J
I
think
that
might
get
to
the
flexibility
that
you're
looking
for
in
allowing
there
to
be
something
without
a
means
test,
while
also
preserving
some
of
the
ability
to
smoothly
adjudicate
the
other
subsections
by
having
the
means
test
in
there.
So
if
you
go,
I'm
a
person
with
a
terminal
illness
and
it
is
going
to
be
a
hardship
for
me
to
move.
J
You
don't
have
to
cite
you
know
section
whatever
one
that
was
c2
e,
you
sight
c2f
and
you
say
yes,
I
might
make
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
and
I
live
by
myself.
So
I'm
over
the
120
threshold,
but
I'm
terminally
ill
and
my
doctor
says
I'm
probably
gonna
pass
in
the
next
three
months
and
the
hearing
officer
has
the
flexibility
to
go.
Yes,
that
makes
sense.
Having
you
spend
six
months.
J
Looking
for
a
new
home
when
you're,
possibly
going
to
pass
away
in
three
months,
doesn't
make
any
sense,
we're
obviously
not
going
to
hold
you
to
a
means
test.
Maybe
that's
how
we
build
that
flexibility
that
I
think
you're
looking
for
in
to
it,
without,
while
still
keeping
some
of
the
streamline.
That,
I
think
is
where
staff
is
saying.
You
know
having
a
repeatable
process
that,
where
hearing
officers
are
not
constantly
asked
to
use
their
own
discretion
on
whether
or
not
a
banked
increase
makes
sense
for
people
with
no
limits
and
creating.
J
If
the
mobile
home
landlord
indicates
that
they
withdrew,
the
proposed
run
increase,
but
I
don't
know
how
we
would
know
that
that
actually
happened
and
be
able
to
enforce
that.
It
actually
happened
unless
we're
having
banked
increased
withdrawal
forms.
So
that
would
be
something
I
would
propose
as
a
modification,
and
that's
all
from
me
thank
you.
J
J
How
are
we
going
to
monitor
and
trust
but
verify
that
they
don't
then
come
back
to
their
tenant
and
say:
oh
see
a
month
later?
Well,
you
actually
paid
the
first
month
at
this
with
the
bank
increase,
and
then
I
got
your
petition
to
go
away
and
now
I'm
back
to
charging
you
the
higher
rate.
Is
it
something
where
we
would
just
expect
the
tenant
to
come
back
to
us
and
tell
us
okay
yeah,
I
mean.
R
A
And
staff
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
on
this,
but
if
a
landlord
will
was
to
respond
and
say
I'm
withdrawing
the
petition
or
I'm
withdrawing
the
rent
increase
as
their
response,
then
that
response
would
be
forwarded
by
staff
to
the
the
tenant.
So
they
would
get
the
notification
in
that
way
and
probably
get
additional
information,
like
with
all
outcomes
and
notices
of
determination
that
are
made.
O
X
So
you
know
you
kind
of
in
a
sense
got
the
rest
of
these
regs
when
you
say
extenuating
circumstances
and
don't
define
it
and
a
hearing
officer
can
use
their
own
discretion
and
basically
find
a
hardship
for
any
reason
they
want
to.
When
you
don't
define
extenuating
circumstances.
So
to
me,
that's
a
real
problem.
I
think
if
we
there's
there's
a
good
basis
to
say
there,
there
should
be
extenuating
circumstances
that
constitute
a
hardship,
but
I
think
we
should
define
them.
Otherwise
the
regs
don't
mean
anything.
I
mean
we
can
talk
about.
X
Y
R
Y
R
Y
R
A
That's
correct
and
we
from
the
petition
history
we've
not
received
a
tenant
hardship
petition
in
in
quite
a
while,
and
it's
always
across
I'm
not
sure.
If
we've
ever
received
any
that
are
specific
in
the
criteria.
I'd
have
to
go
back
and
double
check,
but
the
bulk
of
them
have
been
the
100
ami
or
below
so
just
to
clarify
that
as
well
and
we've
never
received
one
that
has
had
an
other
extenuating
circumstances,
except
for
one
related
to
a
landlord
petition.
N
H
O
I
Thank
you
so
so
much
thanks.
I
love
vice
chair,
haynes,
livesay's,
elegant
solution
of
keeping
the
essentially
the
automatic
part
there
and
then
having
a
nice
little
addendum
to
that
to
at
least
allow
for,
for
that,
I'd
like
to
say
option
to
have
based
on
the
discretion
of
the
hearing
officer.
I
I'm
actually
after
listening
to
committee
member
part
of
the
zella
I
I
do
understand
that
other
extenuating
circumstances
can
be
a
big
catch-all.
I
So
if
we
don't
include
that
in
the
what
vice
chair,
haynes
lives
say
put
in
the
item,
f,
that's
fine
with
me.
That
seems
like
a
pretty
good
compromise
there
and
thank
you
committee,
member
grunwald,
I'm
thinking
about
it.
We
we
focus
so
much
on,
like
oh
50
of
rent,
and
it
doesn't
include
at
all
the
mortgage
and
that's
a
very
unique
position
for
the
mobile
home
rent
residents
who
rent
their
face
own
their
home.
I
I
would
love
for
the
the
mortgage
to
be
included
in
that
50.
I
Otherwise,
that
is
a
level
of
ridiculousness
that
I
I
think
we
should
at
least
attempt
to
address.
I
actually
do
think
that
50
of
your
income
being
paid
toward
rent
is
awful
and
outrageous,
and
I
wouldn't
mind
that
being
lowered
as
well.
If
anyone
else
has
a
a
thought
on
that,
that
would
be
I
I
am
open
to
lowering
it.
I
wouldn't
know
what
percentage
to
lower
and
that's
that
is
my
concern.
I
I
know
that
statistically
you're
supposed
to,
if,
if
you
pay
more
than
30
percent
of
your
income
on
rent,
you
are
usually
considered
rent
burden,
but
I
think
the
50
percent
was
the
s,
what
the
severely
rent
burden,
and
so
at
least
at
the
very
least,
the
very
minimum
to
include
the
mortgage
of
the
house,
including
included
in
that
that
pers,
that
50
of
rent
and
I'm
open
to
lowering
that
percentage.
I
just
don't
know
to
what
point
I
mean
of
your
income
being
paid
toward
rent.
L
J
I
just
have
a
question
for
staff:
are
these
numbers
derived
from
your
adjusted
gross
income
or
your
gross
income,
meaning
if
I
have
a
small
business,
and
I
can
do
my
write-offs,
which
I
totally
know
that
people
can
do
and
get
myself
a
lower,
adjusted
gross
income?
Because
of
my
write-offs?
Are
we?
Are
we
taking
that
into
consideration
when
we're
talking
about
your
ami,
because
I
think
when
we're
talking
about
income,
not
everyone
earns
income
in
the
same
way
and
not
everyone.
J
You
know
we
have
to
be
mindful
of
the
fact
that
two
people
who
make
income
in
different
ways
and
do
their
deductions
a
different
way,
could
derive
vastly
different
results
and
actually
be
similarly
situated.
So
I
think,
if
we're
talking
about
changing
a
percentage,
we
need
to
know
what
the
ami
actually
is
derived
from.
If
we're
talking
about
changing
the
word
rent
to
housing
costs,
meaning
mortgage
plus
rent
for
space
rent,
I
think
that's
a
different
conversation.
N
J
I
think
I
might
be
able
to
formulate
a
motion
that
takes
at
least
some
of
the
commentary
into
account.
It
may
not
be
exactly
the
right
motion,
but
I
think
the
motion
for
chapter
eight
would
be
to
adopt
the
regulations
as
written
with
a
modification
to,
and
I've
got
to
get
my
screens
up
here
so
bear
with
me,
everybody
section
subsection
c
2
a
to
change.
J
I,
whose
household
income
does
not
exceed
120
percent
and
start
the
sentence
with
any
household
which
does
not
qualify
under
the
definitions
of
hardship
included
in
subsection
c2a
through
c2e
of
this
chapter,
eight
and
three
would
become
two
which
household
demonstrates.
Other
extenuating
circumstances
may
request.
Such
circumstances
be
considered
hardship
for
the
purpose
of
subsection
c.
Six
of
this
chapter
eight.
I
think
that
might
be
a
motion.
J
J
Well
then,
I
guess
we
have
to
change
it
everywhere.
I
think
in
that
subsection
to
change,
I
think
the
goal
there,
as
I
heard
it,
was
potentially
to
change
the
language
so
that,
instead
of
rent,
we
say
overall
housing
cost,
including
rent
plus
structure
cost
and
I'm
not
being
very
elegant
there.
So
I
would.
X
O
L
I
X
H
O
L
O
N
Thank
you
chair
and
members
of
the
rental
housing
committee.
We
would
like
to
update
you
on
some
amendments
that
are
going
to
be
proposed
to
the
epc
and
to
city
council
shortly
as
a
result
of
the
city
council,
adopting
the
mobile
home,
rent,
stabilization,
ordinance
and
tenant
relocation,
assistance
benefits.
N
What
type
of
relocation
assistance
is
being
provided
for?
In
the
trail,
a
full
security
deposit
refund,
a
subscription
service
to
a
rental
agency,
a
cash
equivalent
of
three
months,
rent
based
on
and
a
median
monthly
rent
for
a
similar
size
unit?
In
mountain
view
and
special
circumstances?
Households
receive
an
additional
eight
thousand
dollars
per
rental
unit,
which
include
persons
over
62
years,
old,
disabled
or
handicapped,
or
with
minor
children
who
are
legally
dependent.
N
N
So
next
steps
would
be
that
these
proposed
amendments
will
be
submitted
to
the
environmental
planning
commission,
who
will
review
these
amendments
and
provide
recommendations
to
city
council.
And
then
these
proposed
amendments
and
recommendations
will
be
submitted
to
city
council
for
review
and
approval.
Y
N
Y
N
I
L
So
I'm
assuming
there
are
no
more
hands
raised
from
the
committee.
Am
I
right
before
I
go
on
correct?
Okay?
So,
since
there
are
no
more
questions,
I
now
invite
public
comments.
Would
any
member
of
the
public
on
the
line
like
to
provide
comment
on
this
item?
If
so,
please
click
the
raise
hand,
button
and
zoom
or
press
star
9
on
your
phone
staff
will
display
a
countdown
timer
on
the
screen.
H
S
S
It's
depressing,
it's
life-altering,
losing
one's
home
through
no
fault
of
one's
own
is
an
event
that
completely
upends
people's
lives,
and
we
need
to
take
this
threat
seriously
there.
The
landlord
sent
a
letter
to
city
council
september
28th
of
last
year
threatening
displacement
of
all
of
the
200
rentals
in
the
mobile
in
his
mobile
home
parks
in
mountain
view.
So
we
need
to
not
take
these
as
idle
threats,
so
I
would
like
to
propose
or
reinforce
the
following
changes
to
the
trail.
S
S
We
we
need
to
make
it
more
costly
for
the
landlord
to
go
through
on
his
threats
of
displacing
people
not
make
it
less
costly
right
now,
there's
a
lot
of
wealthy
people
renting
their
homes
and
mountain
views.
In
fact,
if
you
fill
out
a
recent
rent
application,
you
have
to
show
three
times
the
rent
and
income
and
rents
are
approaching
4
000
a
month.
S
The
second
change
should
be
lengthening
the
time
for
giving
peoples
notice,
particularly
if
you're
a
senior
if
you're
disabled
or,
if
you've
lived
in
your
home
a
long
time
you
should
be
given
extensive,
noticing
requirements.
Somebody
that's
been
in
their
homes
for
15
years
should
be
given
plenty
of
time
to
find
a
new
place.
S
U
U
I
think
someone
used
as
an
example
as
someone
who
would
not
qualify
for
help.
That
could
be
nothing
here.
They
could
have.
You
know
they
could
be
disabled,
I'm
a
disabled,
my
mom's
disabled,
and
we
have
incredibly
high
expenses
for
things.
These
are
other
things
that
should
be
taken
into
account,
so
I
think
means
testing
should
be
eliminated
for
relocation,
expenses
and
another
item.
I'd
like
to
just
bring
up
is
possibly
lengthening
the
time
for
giving
folks
like
for
giving
people.
You
know
notice
to
leave
it
in
this.
U
I'm
particularly
talking
about
seniors
the
disabled,
those
with
children.
I
would
like
that
to
possibly
be
discussed,
and
I
believe
we
did
say
that
we
would
fully
refund
security
deposits.
I
hope
that
is
part
of
it,
and
it
should
definitely
include
provisions
for
first
right
of
return
and
in
the
event
of
sale.
First
right
of
purchase
would
also
be,
I
think,
important
I
know
living
in
sahara
mobile.
U
I
have
not
felt
secure
living
in
this
house
in
this
park
and
knowing
that
that
is,
there
would
make
me
and
my
mother
sleep
a
lot
better
at
night,
I'm
sure
as
many
other
residents
too
I'd
love
for
that
to
be
thought
about
and
again.
Thank
you
again
for
all
your
hard
work
on
this
and
discussion
and
great
questions.
Thank
you.
T
I
think
that
the
more
that
we
can
do
to
protect
the
vulnerable
people
in
our
community,
the
better
and
that
treyo
is
something
that
is
necessary
to
help
protect
people
in
an
event
that
otherwise
would
be
intensely
traumatic,
so
reducing
the
friction
and
making
sure
that
they
have
what
they
need
to
cope
in
any
way
possible.
Please
do
thanks.
V
Thank
you.
So
when
the
csfra
was
passed,
there
was
in
the
language
of
the
csfra
a
hard
cutoff
for
that
120
percent
was
the
highest
income
for
providing
relocation
assistance
and
I
don't
believe,
that's
the
case
with
the
mobile
home,
rent
stabilization
ordinance,
and
you
know
similar
to
my
prior
comments.
V
Z
Q
So
an
individual
earning
120
is
different
from
family
members
that
total
120,
but
have
eight
people
involved.
That's
number
one
number
two,
I'm
concerned
about
the
well.
I
agree
with
what
eddie
keating
said
about
some
kind
of
flexibility
relative
to
120
percent,
and
I
think
that
an
issue
or
an
item
that
was
presented
a
while
back
in
this
meeting
said
stated:
120
plus
5
000,
and
I
think
that
makes
sense
rather
than
perhaps
having
two.
L
J
I
have
questions.
Can
I
ask
questions
of
course:
okay,
first
and
foremost,
first
question:
I
am
under
the
impression,
perhaps
wrongly,
that
we
are
not
actually
passing
this.
This
belongs
to
city
council
and
at
maximum.
All
we
would
be
doing
is
providing
commentary
on
the
item
that
could
be
passed
to
city
council,
I'm
getting
a
nod
from
anki,
so
I
think
I
am
correct.
Karen
is
confirming
okay.
J
J
Yes,
it's
in
the
current
trail,
so
the
the
modifications-
and
I
I
sort
of
wasn't
in
the
same
situation
as
as
committee
member
grimwald-
that
because
it
was
the
sections
with
the
new
language
and
not
redlined,
I
wasn't
keeping
it
100
straight,
but
the
real
modification
that
we're
seeing
here
is
to
include
the
mobile
home
tenants
not
to
materially
tweak
anything
else.
Is
that
really
what
we're
seeing.
N
That
was
the
intention
of
staff,
because
there
were
concerns
being
brought
in
front
of
the
rental
housing
committee
that
tenants
felt
unprotected.
So
we
did
our
utmost
to
bring
this
back
as
fast
as
possible,
which
we
are
now
doing
so
without
tweaking
any
other
essential
elements
of
the
trail.
We
just
want
to
include
the
mobile
home
tenants
right
now,
so
that
has
a
hopefully
a
faster
path
to
to
have
amendments
approved
by
city,
council
and
the
environmental.
I
I
I
also
feel
super
warm-hearted
that
a
lot
of
the
mobile
home
residents
seeing
most
protections
that
have
been
fought
for
and
organized
for
when
you
look
in
other
cities,
a
lot
of
mobile
home
residents
only
focused
on
those
who
owned
their
home
and
they
didn't
look
at
the
protections
of
those
who
rented
homes,
and
it
was
mostly
forgotten
in
many
other
cities
in
their
ordinances.
I
believe
even
sunnyvale's.
I
They
have
an
mou
and
they
they
don't
cover
those
who
rent
and
I'm
so
very
happy
that
we
are
looking
at
making
sure
that
we
protect
those
who
who
do
rent
their
home,
the
mobile
homes
here
as
well
so
kudos
to
mountain
view,
because
we're
just
so
much
better
than
all
the
other
cities,
but
should
should
we
want
to
be
more
creative
in
expanding
treyo.
I
am
not
opposed
to
that,
but
a
priority
is
getting
it
passed
quickly.
Thank
you.
G
Well,
I
will
also
like
to
support
public
comment.
I
believe
that
they
they
they
are
the
ones
that
are
immediately
being
affected
by
it
and
also
I
would
like
to
add-
I
mean
I
would
like
to
also
support
what
member
ramos
is
his
saying,
because
I
totally
agree
with
her
and
thirdly,
I
would
like
to
remind
all
of
you
one
case
that
we
had
in
2005
rock
street,
where
we
had
a
committee
where
we
had
a
resident
who
she
was
a
person
that
took
care
of
the
elderly.
G
She
had
a
business
that
took
care
of
the
elderly
here
in
mountain
view
and
because
she
was
not
eligible
to
get
the
triu,
we
no
longer
have
her
living
in
mountain
view.
So
for
us
here
in
mountain,
we
have
a
great
loss
because
since
she
doesn't
live
here
close
by
us
anymore,
she's
not
serving
all
those
elderly
people
that
she
was
serving,
so
that's
a
great
loss.
G
There's
a
lot
of
nurses,
assistants
and
with
the
pandemic
and
with
the
new
uptake
in
in
omicron,
I
would
like
all
of
you
to
really
really
consider
the
income
to
to
increase,
because
just
like
member
ramos
was
saying
so
I
just
wanted
to
add
those
comments.
So
the
hopefully
city
council
hears
this
and
remember
the
great
loss
that
we've
had
and
the
possible
losses
that
we
may
have.
If
this
doesn't
go
through,
it
doesn't
go
through
fast.
N
L
N
N
Csf
refunds
are
solely
to
be
used
for
the
csfa
program
and
collected
from
rental
housing
units.
So
this
money
cannot
be
used
for
the
mobile
home
program
and
the
rental
housing
committee
in
and
subsequent
meeting
needs
to
establish
a
budget
and
fee
amount
for
the
mobile
home
rent
stabilization
ordinance.
N
So
in
in
regards
to
that,
the
mon,
the
mobile
home
rent
stabilization
ordinance,
does
need
advanced
funding
from
the
city
to
support
the
startup
costs
of
the
program.
The
the
key,
the
key
components
of
such
startup
costs
are
to
develop
the
the
mhrso
rules
and
regulations
which
we
are
deep
in
our
knees
with
today
establish
a
process
for
petitions
and
hearings,
but
also
for
capital
improvement,
pass-through
processes.
N
So
a
little
bit
more
comments
about
the
annual
rental
space
fees
and
the
methodology
that
the
rental
housing
committee
chose
to
use
was
calculate
the
annual
renting
housing
fee
by
dividing
the
total
budget
each
year
by
the
total
amount
of
covered
rental
units
and
similarly,
an
mhrso
budget
amount
would
be
divided
by
the
number
of
mobile
home
units.
It's
11
30
for
each
fiscal
year.
N
And
although
we
probably
have
a
much
lower
budget
than
the
csfra,
the
much
much
lower
amount
of
space
units
will
still
make
that
annual
per
space
fee
higher
than
the
csfra
annual
fee.
So
to
mitigate
these
fees.
First
space
unit
in
the
startup
year,
city
staff
has
proposed
to
city
council
to
assist
with
startup
costs
and
the
city
council
will,
in
its
meeting
on
february,
8th,
take
a
look
at
it
and
decide
on
that
request.
N
N
G
L
L
V
V
L
Q
H
U
Thank
you
I'll
make
this
quick.
I
just
also
wanted
to
voice
my
support
for
this
city
staff
does
so
much,
and
I
think
the
city
should
give
money
to
to
help
in
any
way
that
rhd
is
asking
for
help.
This
is
something
that's
critically
important
and
we
don't
want
people
to
burn
out,
probably
any
more
so
than
they
already
have
and
again.
Thank
you
for
all
your
hard
work.
L
L
I
Let
that
be
work
itself
out.
I
feel
like
I'm
being
very
committee
member
grunwald
in
this
sense,
but
I
would
like
to
see
if
there's
a
preference
from
council
for
that
like
would
they
rather
have
us,
pay
it
all
back
at
once,
but
that
trade-off
would
be
that
it'd
be
a
higher
immediate
fee
to
the
park
owners.
Or
would
they
rather
allow
us
to
pay
it
back
in
segments
and
have
that
that
be
a
little
less
of
a
sticker
shock?.
N
L
The
fees
would
be
so
high
that
there
would
be
potential
lawsuits
from
park
owners
if
we
were
to
just
turn
just
base
it
on.
You
know
the
costs,
so
I
don't
want
to
get
us
stuck
in
this
whole
idea
that
that
we're
going
to
model
it
on
the
csf
rate,
payback
the
the
council
decided
to
go
with
an
ordinance
and
they
need
to
fund
it.
J
Okay,
I
was
just
gonna
say
I
think,
given
that
this
is
a
february
item
and
we
are
getting
a
little
long
on
tonight's
meeting
and
this
is
just
informational.
Perhaps
we
save
some
of
the
discussion
around
this
item
to
february
when
we
actually
know
what
we
might
be
receiving
as
opposed
to
putting
too
many
hypotheticals
out
there
right
now,
the
more
hypotheticals
you
put
out,
the
more
likely
folks
are
to
go
down
those
hypothetical
paths,
whereas
if
you
leave
it
more
broad
based,
you
might
be
pleased
to
see
what
you
get.
N
N
So
what
is
an
mru?
It's
a
contractual
agreement
between
the
city
and
a
mobile
home
park
owner
which
stipulates
modified
protections
and
procedures
and
following
a
model
mou
approval
by
the
city
council,
the
park
owner
and
80
of
residents
in
a
mobile
home
park
agree
that
would
create
an
exemption
from
the
ordinance
and
instead,
everyone
has
to
abide
by
the
stipulations
as
written
down
in
the
mouth.
N
These
are
the
key
topics
to
be
covered
by
the
mou.
It's
no
surprise
that
these
are
also
the
key
elements
in
an
ordinance,
so
these
need
to
be
discussed
in
park
owner
and
in
resident
meetings
to
see
what
what
the
stakeholders
would
like
to
see
different
from
an
ordinance
and
what
they
would
like
or
not
would
not
like
to
see
in
an
mou.
N
L
Z
Z
Z
Z
I
don't
see
that
there's
really
much
of
a
path
forward
for
many
of
the
parks.
I
know
that
some
parks
have
better
relationships
and
may
find
common
ground
with
some
of
the
park
owners,
but
as
much
as
possible.
I'd
like
to
try
to
quickly
find
out
where
there
might
be
agreement
and
where
hard
lines
are
drawn.
So
good
luck
in
this
process,
it's
not
going
to
be
easy.
I
don't
don't
have
you
the
problem
that
you
have
to
deal
with.
Thank
you.
T
I
just
like
to
echo
what
tim
said.
Thank
you
guys
for
taking
over
the
process
and
making
sure
that
this
is
gonna,
be
fair,
that
everyone
is
gonna,
be
heard,
and
that
there's
gonna
be
a
lot
of
organization
structure
to
this,
so
that
residents
know
what
to
expect
that
the
owners
feel
like
they
have
a
voice
in
this.
L
W
H
H
H
H
We
are
also
having
those
mobile
home
run
stabilization
stakeholder
meetings
this
week.
So
we
have
one
meeting
wednesday
january
26th
at
6
00
pm,
which
will
also
be
bilingual,
and
we
will
be
finally
having
a
landlord
registration
webinar
this
week,
also
on
wednesday
three
o'clock,
and
then
we
will
also
be
holding
one
february
16th
at
three
o'clock
as
well.
So
there's
one
this
week
and
then
there's
one
on
february
as
well.