►
From YouTube: 11-04-2019: Rental Housing Committee Meeting
Description
Council Chambers, 500 Castro St., Mountain View, CA 94041
7:00 p.m. Monday, November 4, 2019
A
A
C
A
A
A
Okay,
all
right,
all
in
favor
of
approving
the
minutes,
all
right,
all
right,
mm-hmm,
we'll
move
on
to
oral
communication
from
the
public.
This
portion
of
the
meeting
is
reserved
for
persons
wishing
to
address
the
committee
on
any
matter
not
on
the
agenda.
Speakers
are
allowed
to
speak
on
any
topic
for
one
three-minute
period
during
this
section.
State
law
prohibits
the
committee
from
acting
on
non-agenda
items.
Would
anyone
like
to
address
the
committee
at
this
time
on
a
non-agenda
item.
A
D
D
D
But
there
is
a
plan
to
address
these
items
and
these
issues
on
the
November
12th
meeting
of
the
City
Council,
though
they
do
have
this
kind
of
failsafe
or
pressure
valve
if
things
run
over
or
if
there
are
revisions
or
some
sort
of
return
of
potential
content
to
a
subcommittee.
The
City
Council
could
choose
to
hold
a
meeting
on
the
26th
and
act
at
that
time,
but
otherwise
we
anticipate
November
12th
will
be
the
big
day
with
that
said,
I
can
give
you
an
update.
D
You
should
be
familiar,
hopefully
with
these
slides,
but
not
necessarily
that
content.
So
this
content
is
revised
based
on
the
October
14th
meeting,
to
clarify
the
elements
or
the
potential
content
that
the
subcommittee
is
sending
to
the
City
Council
for
review
on
November
12th.
So,
first
off
discussing
the
relationship
between
the
rhc
and
the
city
and
city
council,
there
are
four
main
bullet
points:
four
main
elements
and
you'll
notice.
This
is
much
reduced
from
the
previous
discussion
of
the
RHC
city
city
council
relationship.
D
Second,
the
council
is
looking
for
the
ability
to
delegate
tasks
to
the
rhc,
and
that
does
include,
as
requested
by
the
RHC,
some
sort
of
financing
mechanism
that
is
yet
to
be
fully
fleshed
out
and
it
could
be
fleshed
out
in
an
ordinance
that
is
actually
delegating
authority
to
you.
But
that
is
one.
B
D
Obligations
for
such
delegation
that
the
City
Council
addressed
that
budgetary
concern
that
was
expressed.
Third,
the
council
does
wish
to
allow
non-residents
to
serve
on
the
RHC
and
there's
a
caveat
around
that.
The
City
Council
would
need
to
first
identify
that
there
is
a
lack
of
qualified
applicants
from
within
the
city
amount
of
Mountain
View
residents.
D
With
that
said,
the
council
was
very
specific
with
respect
to
capital
improvements
that
essentially
asks
that
landlords
be
able
to
recoup
expenses
for
certain
specified
capital
improvements,
and
there
is
a
lot
of
delegation
here,
granting
the
RHC
authority
to
implement
a
streamlined
process.
The
word
streamlined
has
been
used
repeatedly
and
the
amendments
would
grant
you
that
authority
to
draft
or
create
a
process
that
you
think
is
appropriate
within
some
specific
parameters.
The
parameters
haven't
really
changed.
There
are
three
categories
currently
drafted.
D
As
of
October
14th,
the
first
of
which
is
necessary,
Capital
Improvements
that
address
health
and
safety
codes,
that's
already
included
in
the
CSF,
are
a
but
required
to
be
addressed
through
the
fair
return
process
right
now,
so
it
would
pull
that
out.
Second,
there's
a
category
of
environmental
sustainability
and
there
are
some
strings
attached
to
environmentally
sustainable
capital
improvements
specifically
related
to
benefiting
tenants
and
cost
reductions.
Third,
is
the
ability
to
extend
useful
life
of
the
property,
and
that
is
potentially
a
pretty
broad
category
too.
D
So,
within
these
three
categories,
there
are
three
guiding
principles
benefiting
tenants.
Tenants
excuse
me
reducing
costs
with
respect
to
the
sustainability
category
and
specifically
excluding
luxury
improvements,
so
those
would
be
the
guiding
principles
that
theoretically,
if
the
City
Council
places
this
on
the
ballot,
and
if
the
voters
have
proven
at
a
subsequent
election,
you
would
be
asked
to
implement
these
particular
guidelines
and
these
specific
categories.
D
There
are
some
features
of
the
separate
process
that
were
spelled
out
so
some
additional
parameters
on
your
specified
capital
improvement
process,
the
first
of
which
is
to
include
capital
improvements
within
overall
year-over-year
cap
on
rent
increases.
The
subcommittee
expressed
an
interest
in
maintaining
that
10%
cap
and
that
would
be
inclusive
of
the
annual
general
adjustment
or
other
increases,
and
then
the
second
is
a
mandate
to
you
to
actually
adopt
an
amortization
schedule
and
identify
specific
improvements
that
would
qualify
under
those
three
categories:
again:
health
and
safety
code,
environmental
sustainability
and
extending
the
useful
life.
D
One
of
the
big
discussion
points
that
you're
familiar
with
is
seismic
retrofits
and
that's
been
discussed
repeatedly,
so
presumably
an
amortization
schedule
regarding
that
with
respect
to
the
annual
general
adjustment-
and
there
was
not
unanimity
or
a
recommendation
from
the
subcommittee,
but
there
were
a
number
of
potential
options,
the
first
of
which
is
to
maintain
the
current
AGA,
which
is
100%
of
CPI.
You
all
items
there
is
another
option
floated
to
set
a
fixed
AGA
percentage,
a
fixed
rate
from
year
to
year,
four
or
five
were
both
floated.
D
Likewise,
there
is
an
option
presented
to
set
a
floating
AGA,
so
use
CPI,
you
all
items
and
then
add
a
percentage
on
top
of
that
and
you'll
see
that
that
concept
is
going
to
be
coming
up
in
our
next
discussion
of
recent
state
legislation.
The
final
option
that
was
thrown
into
the
mix
by
the
subcommittee
with
respect
to
a
potential
amendment
to
the
annual
general
adjustment
relates
to
prohibiting
banking.
D
Finally,
with
respect
to
the
regulation
of
mobile
homes,
the
subcommittee
did
recommend
adding
an
express
exemption
from
the
C
sfra
for
mobile
homes
and
mobile
home
parks
and
then
again
going
back
to
the
relationship
between
the
RH
C
and
the
city
and
City
Council.
They
did
make
clear
in
the
draft
amendments
that
there
is
the
potential
to
assign
implementation
and
administration
of
new
responsibilities
mandated
by
the
council
in
ordinance
to
the
RH
C,
and
with
that
we're
happy
to
take
any
questions.
D
D
Is
contemplated
as
kind
of
a
grand
package,
theoretically
where
the
City
Council
would
propose
as
an
amendment
to
the
C
sfra
exclusion,
so
cutting
out
or
exempting
mobile
homes
from
the
C
sfra.
But
there
are
other
provisions,
the
CSF
array
that
limits
or
constrains
the
City
Council's
ability
to
legislate
with
respect
to
rents
and
evictions,
and
so
that
language
needs
to
be
slightly
amended
such
that
the
City
Council
could
potentially
adopt
some
other
types
of
ordinances,
such
as
a
rent,
stabilization
policy
for
mobile
homes,
which
once
adopted
by
the
City
Council.
D
E
D
Me
to
clarify:
thank
you
with
respect
to
environmental
sustainability.
One
of
the
key
considerations
was
related
to
benefiting
the
tenants,
specifically
by
reducing
utility
costs,
for
instance,
as
some
example.
So
you
can
imagine
a
situation
where
someone
installs
photovoltaic
on
top
of
their
roof.
Now
they
have
electricity
and
reduce
costs
for
electricity
and
that
that
reduced
costs
would
need
to
be
passed
down
to
some
extent
to
the
tenants
in
order
to
have
that
capital
improvement
paid
for
through
this
eligible
capital
improvements
process.
F
A
A
A
G
Good
evening,
so
we
wanted
to
give
you
a
little
update
on
landlord
tenant
legislation,
because
there
are
some
things
that
may
impact
the
rhc
as
we
move
forward,
I,
there's
sort
of
one
major
bill,
1482
and
then
there's
a
variety
of
other
bills
that
impact
the
landlord
tenant
relationship.
So
we're
going
to
go
through
these
and
try
to
explain
them
to
you.
There
are
still
some
questions
on
1482
for
sure.
G
So
1482
was
passed.
It
will
go
into
effect
on
January
1st
2020.
It
contains
two
major
provisions
that
includes
a
Just
Cause
for
eviction
and
it
puts
caps
on
rent
increases
so
for
the
units
that
are
covered,
the
Just
Cause
for
eviction
regulations.
They
apply
for
tenancies,
where
the
tenant
has
lived
there
continuously
for
12
months.
G
It's
a
little
bit
of
a
confusing
section
might
be
a
little
hard
for
people
to
figure
out
that
114
82
does
explicitly
exclude
any
units
that
are
covered
by
a
local,
just
cause
ordinance
that
was
adopted
prior
to
September,
1st
2019
or
a
Just
Cause
ordinance
that
was
adopted
or
amended
post
September,
1st
2019,
that
is
more
restrictive
than
1482,
so
the
SIA
Safari
would
qualify
as
being
adopted
prior
to
September
1st.
So
for
the
units
that
are
covered
by
the
CSF
RA,
they
are
not
covered
by
1482
for
the
Just
Cause
provisions.
G
So
the
Just
Cause
provisions
are
relatively
similar
to
the
C
sfra
they're
broken
into
two
categories:
there's
at
fault
causes,
and
then
there
are
no
fault
causes.
The
at
fault
causes
may
look
begley
familiar
because,
as
they
say,
they
are
somewhat
similar
to
what's
in
the
CSF
RA
what
you
would
expect
failure
to
pay
rent
breach
of
the
lease
violation
of
subletting
provisions,
property
damage,
criminal
activity,
so
those
are
the
general
at
fault
just
causes,
and
then
there
are
no
fault
just
causes
which
generally
can
be
broken
into
four
categories.
G
There's
an
owner
occupancy
of
the
owner
or
certain
family
members
of
the
owner,
elect
to
move
into
the
unit
Ellis
act.
Eviction
is
where
you're
withdrawing
the
unit
from
the
rental
market
government
orders
to
vacate.
These
are
typically
habitability.
Violations
where
the
unit's
not
habitable
or
demolition
or
substantial
remodel
of
the
unit
1482
does
include
a
mandatory
relocation
assistance
provision
that
the
property
owner,
if
they
are
terminating
for
no
fault
cause,
has
to
pay
one
month's
rent
to
the
tenant
either
give
a
rent
credit
or
pay
one
month's
rent.
G
We
put
an
asterisk
here
because
there
is
pending
litigation.
The
only
litigation
so
far,
that's
been
filed
is
challenging
the
relocation
provision
of
1482
so
we'll
see
how
that
comes
out,
and
then
the
second
major
provision
of
1482
is
caps
on
rent
increases,
so
1482
limits
the
number
of
rent
increases
per
year
to
no
more
than
two
and
it
limits
the
amount
of
those
rent
increases
to
5%
plus
the
chain
CPI.
G
Unless
the
owner
occupied
it
for
the
entire
tenancy,
so
the
owner
has
to
have
lived
there
when
the
tenancy
started
and
continuously
occupied
some
single-family
homes.
If
those
single-family
homes
are
owned
by
a
corporation
or
a
real
estate,
investment
trust
or
an
LLC,
and
you
also
have
to
provide
the
tenant
with
certain
notices
for
that
the
single-family
home.
G
So
in
terms
of
how
the
1482
interacts
with
the
C
sfra,
we
struggled
valiantly
to
try
to
come
up
with
an
easy
way
to
explain
this.
But
it's
not
that
easy.
So
we'll
see
if
this
works
so
with
respect
to
apartment
buildings,
apartments
that
are
built
after
December
23
2016
are
not
covered
by
either
the
C
sfra
or
1482,
but
apartment
buildings
apartment
units
built
before
December
23rd
2016
will
be
covered
by
the
C
sfra.
So,
with
regard
to
this
category,
the
C
sfra
is
more
inclusive
than
1482.
G
With
regard
to
rent
increases,
it's
a
little
bit
different,
so
1482
as
I
said
covers
units
that
are
more
than
15
years
old.
You
at
the
CSF
recover
units
that
were
built
before
february
1st
1995,
that's
consistent
with
Casta,
hawkins
and
state
law,
so
1482
covers
more
units
than
the
c
SF
c
sfra
covers
with
regard
to
the
rent
cap.
G
G
Similarly,
with
regard
to
the
rent
increase
regulations,
it's
a
similar
analysis.
Duplex
is
built
after
2005
or
owner-occupied
for
the
entire
tenancy
you're
not
covered
for
the
rent
cap.
But
before
that
period
they
are
covered
by
1482,
but
not
by
the
CSF
are
a
currently
single
family
homes
are
sort
of
uniquely
defined
in
1482.
G
You
don't
currently
cover
single-family
homes,
but
the
1482
with
regard
to
Just
Cause
would
cover
them
if
they
were
built
before
2005
and
they
were
owned
by
a
corporation
or
a
real
estate,
investment
trust
or
some
LLC's
so
and
then,
similarly,
with
the
rent
increase
regulations
similar
analysis
as
to
what
is
covered
by
1482,
but
not
by
the
CSF
ra.
So
with
regard
to
single-family
homes.
G
G
In
addition
to
1482,
there
were
a
variety
of
other
bills
impacting
the
landlord
tenant
relationship.
We
just
want
to
go
through
those
quickly:
a
B,
1,
1,
1
0
changes
the
minimum
period
for
a
rent
increase
notice
for
any
rent
increase
in
excess
of
10%.
It
currently
has
60
days
as
of
January
1st.
That
will
be
a
90
day
notice.
G
G
$13.99
makes
some
amendments
to
the
Ellis
Act.
The
primary
amendment
that
is
of
significance
is
that
it
determines
that
the
date
the
property
is
withdrawn
from
the
market
is
the
last
date
in
any
of
the
notice
is
given
to
the
tenants.
So
this
could
have
some
implications
for
tenants
rights
to
damages
or
their
rights
to
return
to
the
property
if
the
property
owner
rillettes
the
unit
within
certain
periods
of
time
under
state
law,.
G
644
is
a
pretty
specific
bill
designed
to
limit
the
security
deposits
that
are
required
for
members
in
military
service
if
those
members
are
going
to
occupy
the
unit.
So
instead
of
two
months
around
2,000
furnished
in
three
months,
if
it's
furnished
it's
one
month's
rent,
if
it's
unfurnished
in
two
months,
if
it's
furnished
but
if
there's
poor
credit,
it's
potentially
three
months,
rent
sb
18
is
a
continuation
of
a
bill
that
was
going
to
sunset
that
required
a
90
day
notice
for
termination
of
tenancy
Ziff.
G
G
C
C
G
G
C
C
G
To
look
at
our
fa
Q's,
but
the
person
at
risk
of
homelessness
is
not
really
considered
a
subtenant
they're
considered
I
mean
it.
What
the
legislation
is
trying
to
do
is
establish
a
relationship
that
that
person
at
risk
of
homelessness
is
treated
essentially
as
the
same
as
somebody
who's
renting
a
hotel
room
and
has
the
same
rights
as
somebody
who
is
renting
a
hotel
room
as
opposed
to
full
tenancy
rights.
So
there's
provisions
for
termination
that
are
different
than
with
some
of
them
with
full
tenancy
rights.
G
A
Just
as
a
quick
follow-up
on
Emily's,
as
far
as
the
project
regarding
mechanisms
for
enforcement,
the
current
based
on
the
current
process,
if
we
did
nothing
and
didn't
adopt
any
additional
regs
and
someone
raised
one
of
these
issues
to
our
staff
trying
to
I,
guess
they
would
try
to
file
a
petition.
And
then
staff
would
look
at
it.
A
G
G
G
Sure
that
there's
a
lot
of
additional
regulations
I
think
the
the
biggest
issue
that
we
have
with
regard
to
the
intersection
of
1482
and
the
C
sfra
is
the
annual
cap
on
rent
increases,
because
you
have
a
10%
in
your
annual
cap.
Whereas
1482
has
a
cap
of
the
CPI
plus
5%,
which
right
now
would
be
less
than
10%,
and
although
there's
1482
exempt
units
that
are
subject
to
a
local
rent
control
that
has
a
more
restrictive
annual
camp
so
that
annual
cap
from
the
1482
is
probably
going
to
be
our
cap
for
annual
increases.
G
A
G
Cause
so
for
just
cause,
if
you
had
a
local
law
in
effect,
part
of
September
1st
2019,
your
local
law
plays.
If
you
amend
or
adopt
a
Just
Cause
ordinance
after
September
1st
2019,
it
applies
to
the
extent
it
is
more
restrictive,
it
needs
to
be
more
restrictive
so,
and
you
have
to
make
fine
means
that
it's
more
restrictive,
I
see,
but
the
rest
of
the
with.
H
City
or
would
RHC
be
able
to
refer
to
the
city
meet
mediation.
Anyone
who
came
in
about
a
1482
issue
as
sort
of
a
stopgap
just
say:
hey,
that's
not
really
the
space
we're
in
right
now,
but
we
do
offer
a
free
mediation
program.
Perhaps
that
might
help
you,
since
that's
non-binding
yeah.
If
the
parties
voluntarily.
G
B
I
Mediation
program
is
still
in
full
force
and
effect.
What
got
terminated
is
the
rental
housing
dispute
resolution,
because
that
program
was
no
longer
continued
by
City
Council,
so,
instead
of
the
rental
housing,
this
pure
program
measure
fee
came
into
effect,
but
the
voluntary
mediation
program
has
been
in
place
for
over
40
years
and
it's
still
going
strong.
Is
it
who's
funding
it?
The
city
of
modem,
yeah,
okay,.
C
F
F
It's
targeted
towards
city
staff
from
all
over
the
Bay
Area.
We
have
a
couple
legislative
staff,
members
and
representatives
from
a
city
with
rent
control
and
city
without
and
have
also
invited.
Caa
tenants
groups,
high-profile
housing
providers,
but
I'll
be
a
moderated
to
our
discussion
in
Redwood,
City,
Library
I
couldn't
send
I.
Think
conky
has
the
flyer
if
you're
interested
okay
to.
F
A
G
J
J
Four
to
start,
the
presentation
will
be
just
talking
about
some
major
updates
that
happened
during
the
past
fiscal
year
related
to
the
petition
process.
The
first
major
one
was
undertaken
by
the
rhc
and
adopted
in
June
of
2018,
and
that
was
your
tenant
hardship
protections
which
instituted
another
petition
process
for
the
tenants
who
are
experiencing
challenges,
affording
the
banked,
rent
or
rent
increases
related
to
landlord
petitions.
The
next
two
were
adopted
in
November
26
2018,
and
that
was
related
to
the
petition
process
itself.
J
You
adjusted
timeframes
and
schedules
during
that
meeting
and
also
updated
the
vegas
standard.
Additional
major
updates
were
related
to
the
petition
forms
themselves.
We've
been
working
for
the
past
year
to
take
all
of
the
feedback
that
we've
received
from
all
of
the
petitioners
and
clarify
and
simplify
the
instructions.
We've
also
added
in
additional
supportive
worksheets
to
further
clarify
what
is
being
asked
and
we
are
transitioning
to
fillable
forms,
so
people
will
be
able
to
just
type
in
what
they're
wanting
to
input
into
the
petitions
themselves
and
a
quick
reminder.
J
The
purpose
of
the
position
process
is
fourfold
step.
One
is
to
initiate
a
request
for
an
individual
adjustment
of
rent
number
two
is
to
explain
and
document
the
basis
for
a
rent
adjustment.
Number
three
is
to
establish
fair
and
transparent
procedures
and
number
for
us
and
notify
all
parties
of
a
pending
petition
and
allow
them
to
participate
in
the
process.
J
We
have
two
types
of
petitions:
the
petition
for
upward
adjustment
of
rent
related
to
housing
providers
and
landlords,
and
this
is
applicable
if
they
are
unable
to
receive
a
fair
return
on
investment,
and
that's
our
mnay
petition
that
we've
talked
about
so
much
lately.
The
other
side
is
for
tenants
and
that's
the
downward
adjustment
of
rent
petitions.
There
are
three
types
petition:
a
is
for
rent
in
excess
of
lawful
rent
petition.
B
is
a
failure
to
maintain
habitable
premises
or
a
decrease
in
Housing
Services
and
petitions.
C
is
for
under
tenant
hardship.
J
So
those
are
the
ones
that
you
adopted
back
in
June
of
2018.
For
this
presentation,
we're
going
to
go
over
an
overview
of
all
of
the
petitions
and
then
we'll
break
it
down
by
type.
So
you'll
see
the
overview
and
then
I'll
go
ahead
and
talk
about
housing
provider,
landlord
petitions
and
then
tenant
petitions.
We've
received
77
petitions
to
date.
We've
been
receiving
petitions
for
just
about
two
years
now,
and
this
is
the
current
status
of
those
petitions.
We
have
one
in
review
two
in
the
hearing
process.
J
17
petitions
have
settled,
42
have
been
decided,
eight
were
decided
on
appeal
for
with
were
withdrawn
and
three
were
not
accepted,
and
this
is
that
breakdown
by
fiscal
year
so
you'll
see
we
had
13
upward
adjustment
petitions
in
fiscal
year
of
1718
and
five
downward
adjustment.
Three
upward
adjustment
in
1819
49
downward
adjustment
in
1819
and
this
year
we
have
so
far
zero
upward
adjustment,
petitions
and
seven
downward
adjustment
petitions.
J
However,
we
do
have
I
think
three,
maybe
four
upward
adjustment
petitions
in
the
pipeline
and
one
way
that
these
petitions
get
resolved
is
through
settlement
conferences.
We
offer
that
so
that
people
can
sidestep
the
hearing
process
and
when
settlement
conferences
are
requested.
68%
of
them
have
resulted
in
agreements.
So
back
in
1718
we
saw
a
50
percent
settlement
rate
in
1819
that
went
up
to
80
percent
and
so
far
in
1920
were
at
80
percent.
As
well
and
you'll
see
this
breakdown
have
what
we
have.
J
Five
petitions
that
have
requested
settlements,
there's
only
four
that
are
have
finalized.
That
process,
there's
five
that
have
finalized
that
process
and
four
that
have
settled.
So
that's
where
we
get
that
80%
number.
If
not,
if
you
don't
take
that
into
account,
then
math
looks
really
funny
for
Landlord
petitions
we're
going
to
break
those
down.
Now
we
had
16
petitions
that
we've
received
to
date
to
settled.
Seven
were
decided,
three
were
decided
on
appeal,
three
were
withdrawn
and
one
was
not
accepted.
J
The
outcomes
of
those
partitions,
nine
were
decided
with
increase.
One
was
decided
without
an
increase,
two
settled
three
withdrawn
and
again
one
was
not
accepted
for
the
duration
of
petitions
and
17-18
from
acceptance
until
decisions
served,
we
had
a
hundred
and
seventy
four
days
as
our
average
that
takes
into
account
the
multiple.
J
Accommodations
that
were
provided
to
petitioners
requesting
timeframes,
be
pushed
out
to
be
able
to
fulfill
requests
from
hearing
officers
and
four.
If
an
appeal
was
received,
it
would
take
on
average
128
days
from
the
time
the
appeal
was
received
until
appeal
decision
was
served
and
from
the
second
appeal,
if
that
happened,
it
was
60
days
from
the
time
the
appeal
was
received
until
the
time
the
decision
was
served.
Those
last
two
for
the
appeals.
There
were
very
few.
J
So
if
there's
a
blip
in
the
data,
if
something
took
longer,
if
people
requested
different
appeal
dates,
it
changes
the
timeframes
there
and
in
1819
we
only
had
a
settlement
conference
for
landlord
petition,
and
that
was
a
hundred
and
six
days
on
average
and
for
settlement
conferences
related
to
landlord
petitions.
We
had
29
percent
of
settlement
conference
requests
that
resulted
in
agreements.
Six
requests
happened
in
1718,
and
only
one
of
those
petitions
settled
there
was
some.
J
J
However,
the
one
that
is
in
the
pipeline
for
sure
in
my
hands
right
now
going
through
informal
review,
they
have
requested
a
settlement
conference
at
this
time
for
tenant
petitions,
we
received
sixty-one
petitions
to
date.
We
have
one
in
review
two
that
are
in
the
hearing
process,
15
that
have
settled
35
that
were
decided
five
that
were
decided
on
appeal,
one
that
was
withdrawn
and
two
that
were
not
accepted.
J
One
of
the
ones
that
was
not
accepted
had
to
do
with
the
petition
for
unlawful
rent
related
to
the
mobile
homes,
and
this
is
how
that
breaks
down
by
a
petition
type.
We
had
five
unlawful
rent
petitions
in
1718,
no
petition,
be
that's
the
maintenance
and
services
one
and
there
was
not
yet
to
petition
C
in
that
time
period.
For
eighteen
nineteen,
we
had
thirteen
unlawful
rent
petitions,
five
related
to
housing,
services
and
thirty,
one
related
to
hardship,
petitions
and
in
nineteen
twenty.
J
So
far,
we've
had
one
unlawful
rent
to
housing,
services
or
maintenance
and
for
hardship
petitions
filed,
and
this
is
how
that
breaks
down
by
type.
So,
as
you
can
see,
the
majority
of
our
unlawful
rent
petitions
have
to
do
with
a
failure
to
provide
the
rent
roll
back.
We
are
still
receiving
those,
sometimes
from
the
same
property.
We
had
three
that
were
above
the
four
increases
above
the
aga
and
two
that
were
we're.
J
Property
owners
were
filing
for
that
2.6%
thing
to
increase,
and
that
was
not
allowed
for
a
petition,
be
we've
seen
to
failure
to
maintain
habitability,
x'
to
decrease
services
and
three
petitions
where
the
petitioner
was
filing
both
causes
and
for
a
petition
see.
We
had
seventeen
related
seventeen,
undue
hardship,
petitions
related
to
the
AG,
a
and
eighteen
related
to
an
upward
adjustment
of
rent
petition,
and
this
is
the
timeframe
breakdown.
J
So
from
the
acceptance
until
settlement
in
seventeen
eighteen,
it
was
a
twenty
four
day
average
and
in
eighteen
nineteen
it
was
an
eighty
five
day
average
until
the
decision
was
served
and
from
a
if
there
was
an
appeal
which
we
had
three.
It
was
a
forty
five-day
average
until
the
decision
served
and
from
the
second
appeal
until
the
second
appeal
decision,
we
had
one
petition
that
had
a
second
appeal,
and
that
was
a
forty
eight
day.
J
A
forty
eight
day,
time
frame,
we
did
have
settlement
conferences
that
resulted
in
eighty
three
percent
of
the
settlement
conferences
resulting
in
agreements
in
seventeen
eighteen.
It
was
a
hundred
percent.
All
four
petitions
settled
in
eighteen,
nineteen.
Seventy
eight
percent
settled
when
requesting
the
settlement
and
in
nineteen
twenty
so
far,
we've
had
an
eighty
percent
rate
and
for
future
updates
and
the
petition
process.
This
is
what
staff
is
working
on
this
year,
we're
going
to
finalize
the
transition
to
the
fillable
PDF
forms,
so
we
will
actually
have
for
housing
provider.
J
J
The
staff
has
to
go
in
and
code
the
forms,
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
as
useful
as
possible
and
that
cap
up
to
fifteen
as
most
of
our
buildings,
so
we're
hoping
that
that
slight
difference
between
the
two
forms
would
be
helpful
to
people,
so
they
weren't
have
to
be
swimming
through
multiple
pages
of
a
form
with
all
the
same
information
number
two
is
to
complete
the
design
of
the
online
petition
process.
So
right
now
we're
a
petition,
our
housing
provider
portal
that
we
have
up
and
running.
J
A
No
I
have
a
couple
based
on
based
on
the
volume
they
have
right
now
for
petitions
and
what
we
and
maybe
we
get
into
this
in
the
next
item,
but
now
that
we
have
a
few
years
under
our
belt,
do
you
feel
like
we
will
be?
Are
we
using
the
volume
to
forecast
budget
for
upcoming
the
upcoming
years?
I
think
that
that
is.
J
J
Additionally,
we're
still
fighting
the
confluence
of
people
feeling
uncomfortable
coming
in
filing
petitions,
especially
tenants.
We
receive
a
lot
of
feedback
from
tenants,
specifically
that
they're,
fearful
of
retaliation
from
their
property
owner
if
they
file
a
petition,
and
so
while
we
know
that
there
are
quite
a
few
property
owners
that
have
not
rolled
back
the
rent
or
have
possibly
provided
unlawful
rent
increases.
People
are
still
not
comfortable
using
the
protections
that
that
we
have.
J
So
that
is
something
that
we're
hopefully
going
to
be
able
to
specifically
target
this
year
as
we
expand
our
outreach
in
slightly
more
targeted
ways.
Additionally,
if
there
is
a
CSF
or
a
amendment
that
creates
a
separate
capital
improvement
petition
process,
that
likely
would
increase
our
petition
load.
A
I
A
J
Big
the
bump
was,
or,
for
instance,
if
something
like
the
soft
storey
ordinance
and
the
capital
improvement
process
ended
up
both
going
through.
We
could
see
a
significant
increase
where
we
would
have
to
potentially
hire
contract
staff
to
help
alleviate
some
of
the
challenges
associated
with
processing
those
but
I
think
currently.
H
A
A
J
So
if
you
were
specifically
looking
for
it
to
be
up
and
running
as
an
online
format
in
our
portal
that
at
this
time
would
take
a
little
while
how
being
able
to
have
forms
and
all
of
that
stuff,
formatted
and
ready
to
go,
should
it
need
need
to
be.
We
can
definitely
do
that
at
this
point.
That
is
something
that
staff
can
can
handle
and
is
prepared
to
handle
quickly.
But
our
I
mean
we.
J
We
don't
have
the
landlord
petition
process
at
all
on
the
database,
we're
just
finishing
up
the
tenant
petitions
and
that's
taken
a
while,
it's
quite
heavy
on
the
back
end,
to
get
it
to
be
functional
in
any
way,
shape
or
form,
so
we're
trying
to
make
that
process
when
people
sit
down
at
the
computer
not
feel
burned
some
and
overwhelming,
and
it
turns
out
designing.
That
is
it's
quite
a
lift,
so
I
also
want
to
add
if.
I
A
D
J
A
Think
when
we
were
talking
about
this
system,
the
IT
system,
there
was
maybe
a
question
of
we.
If
other
jurisdictions,
you
know,
ended
up
either
new
jurisdictions
to
pass
rent
control
or
other
ones
that
had
recently
passed
rent
control,
we
might
be
able
to
share
see
if
see,
if
there's
an
opportunity,
kind.
J
J
J
A
E
Anybody
in
this
room
can
answer
it,
but
the
ballot
initiative
I've
never
seen
in
it
any
language
about
like
an
implementation
schedule.
So
the
ballot
initiative
sets
out
we'll
eventually
have
language
that
sets
out
the
specifics
right,
but
from
what
conky
is
saying
it,
it
would
come
back
to
us
to
have
to
implement
certain
parts
of
it
if
it.
I
G
A
A
I
The
purpose
of
this
agenda
item
is
for
the
rental
housing
committee
to
review
and
decide
on
a
work
plan
for
the
rental
housing
committee
for
the
calendar
year
2020,
we
made
a
draft
work
plan,
like
we
did
for
previous
years,
trying
to
give
enough
space
for
when,
eventually
a
Caesar
for
amendment
might
be
adopted,
in
which
case
probably
a
lot
of
regulation.
Work
is
coming
up
again,
so
we
provided
some
space
for
that
in
each
of
the
agenda
dates.
I
K
A
C
A
All
right,
Thank,
You,
Emily
I
mean
I
guess.
My
comment
would
just
be
that
this
looks
like
a
good
framework
and
I
think
we
we
have
there's
so
much
riding
on
the
potential
ballot
initiative
and
additional
work
that
we
could
potentially
have
that
I
like
the
idea
of
keeping
this
relatively
flexible
and
simple
for
now,
and
that
if
a
ballot
initiative
doesn't
pass,
then
it
will
have
different
work.
It
can
focus
on
different
things.
So
a
lot
riding
on
that.
A
I
This
agenda
item
is
for
the
rental
housing
committee
to
review
the
quarterly
financial
expenditures
through
September
the
30th
of
2019,
also
known
as
quarter
one.
The
key
categories
haven't
changed
from
previous
years.
We
usually
group
our
expenditures
by
personnel
services,
non-personnel
services,
capital
outlay
and
inner
fund
expenditures
for
personnel
services
about
21%
is
expended,
and
that
is
slightly
below
budget
due
to
justice,
celery-root
salary
scales,
where
our
personnel
is
at.
I
At
this
point
for
non
personal
services,
there
is
only
11
percent
expended
and
70
percent
encumbered,
so
the
encumbered
part
is
where
we
have
contracts
in
place
for
the
rest
of
the
year
for
anticipated
costs,
and
currently
the
expenditures
are
below
budget
due
to
the
quarterly
billing
of
service,
providing
there's
usually
happening.
The
quarter
after
the
quarter
is
served,
and
today
there
are
fewer
petitions,
hearings
and
appeals,
which
means
less
hearing
officer
and
legal
costs
for
capital
outlay.
We
have
0%
expended
and
21%
is
encumbered,
and
that
refers
back
to
the
contract.
I
We
have
with
3di
where
they
are
providing
a
lot
of
services
without
and
there's
a
lot
of
deliverables
in
each
face,
so
they
haven't
even
sent
as
a
second
invoice
yet
because
we're
still
lived
working
on
the
deliverables
for
this
phase
number
two
in
general,
we
ourselves
were
very
surprised
at
the
amount
of
services
that
they're
providing
for
us.
Considering
the
total
amount
of
the
contract
itself.
I
I
H
H
A
A
G
This
item
came
up
at
your
last
meeting.
Vice
chair
ramos
asked
to
agenda
as
an
item
to
discuss
placing
on
a
future
agenda
regulations
for
mobile
homes,
so
this
is
consistent
with
your
rules
for
operation,
which
are
in
chapter
3
of
your
regulations
that,
if
an
RHC
member
wants
an
item
placed
on
the
agenda,
the
appropriate
action
is
to
put
that
our
agency
members
request
on
the
agenda
and
then
the
rhc
will
determine
whether
the
item,
the
substantive
item,
is
put
on
a
future
agenda.
So
this
is
a
procedural
item.
G
This
is
not
a
substantive
discussion,
so
the
topic
is
whether
you
want
to
have
a
discussion
at
a
future
date
on
mobile
home
regulations,
as
opposed
to
a
discussion
about
mobile
home
regulations.
Just
to
note,
you
are
still
currently
involved
in
litigation
on
this
topic
at
the
court
of
appeal.
So
just
to
remind
everybody
of
that
fact,.
G
E
G
Spoke
with
your
council
on
that
appeal,
the
appeal
is
fully
briefed.
It's
been
fully
briefed
for
a
couple
months.
At
this
point,
the
Court
of
Appeal
doesn't
have
any
time
requirement
for
when
they
have
to
schedule
oral
argument
once
they
do
scheduled
or
oral
argument.
They
have
90
days
from
that
argument
to
issue
a
decision,
but
it
could
be.
You
know,
six
months
before
they
scheduled
I.
You
know
it
really
depends
on
what
their
docket
looks
like
and
how
they
arrange
their
cases.
So
we
really
don't
have
any
idea.
G
E
B
B
B
E
G
A
K
Alex
Brown
South,
dagger,
Bella,
North
Bay,
show
around
you.
Yes,
please!
Please,
yes,
satis,
have
somebody
great
revisiting
the
decision
before
for
the
new
members
and
going
over
why
the
decision
was
made
in
the
first
place
in
regards
to
the
litigation,
the
impact
of
n
decisions
that
you
made
and
could
make
on
the
litigation.
It
would
be
nice
to
cover,
at
least
to
the
extent
that
you
can
in
public
forum
I
would
like
to
hear
what
you
could
do
and
how
they
could
maybe
make
the
litigation
go
away.
K
Wouldn't
that
be
nice,
no
more
lawyers
or
judges
just
just
well,
except
for
the
good
lawyers
who
we
like
and
yeah
anyway.
Yes,
please
use
your
resources
to
help
the
people
that
you
can
now
when
you
can.
Yes,
the
City
Council
has
said
they're
acting,
they
might
be
able
to
do
some
stuff.
They
might
do
everything,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
you
can't
also
act
it
now
to
take
care
of
what
you
can
do
and
that
they
can
augment
that
they
can
work
on
top
of
what
you
have
the
power
to
fix.
L
Does
it
make
sense
for
this
Rental
Housing
Committee
to
also
administer
that
other
ordinance
that
would
apply
only
to
the
mobile
homes
or
would
it
make
more
sense
to
have
a
separate
body
that
which
might
be
kind
of
redundant,
but
that
would
administer
the
other
ordinance?
And
so
assuming
you
do
move
forward
with
a
study
session.
I
hope
that
one
of
the
questions
that
helps
focus
that
is,
do
there
need
to
be
to
rental
housing
committees
to
administer.
L
E
A
G
G
G
Not
prohibited
from
taking
action
if
you
were
to
agenda
as
an
item
at
a
future
meeting
that
were
as
to,
as
was
suggested
by
one
of
the
speakers
to
reconsider
your
action
that
you
took
in
February
of
2018
you're
not
prohibited
from
doing
that.
If
that's
the
item
you
want
to
agendize,
my
suggestion
would
be
that
you
agenda
is
that
Plus,
you
agenda
is
a
closed
session
with
your
counsel
and
the
litigation
before
that
at
that
same
meeting.
So
you
understand
the
issues
then
link
him
up.
C
C
C
They
are
not
as
a
meshed
in
the
CSF
ra
and
in
the
rent
control
laws
that
are
one
applicable
and
not
applicable
as
we
are,
and
one
of
the
things
that
I
want.
There
are
several
benefits
that
we
can
gain
from
having
a
stay
section
is
the
council.
This
is
this
emotion.
Did
you
just
make
a
motion?
They
did
make.
E
C
On
recommendations
to
the
City
Council
regarding
a
mobile
home
park,
ordinance
on
December's
meeting
agenda,
it's
a
like
committee
member
honey
had
said
council
has
prioritized.
This
I
feel
that
they
need
a
lot
of
guidance
and
it
will
be
essentially
Matthew
that
will
be
speaking
up
on
our
rent
on
behalf
of
our
rental
housing
committee
to
the
council,
and
you
will
get
peppered
with
a
lot
of
questions
that
I
want
to
enable
you
to
have
the
answers
to.
Does
that
make
sense?
A
G
C
Someone
rolled
the
idea
that
oh
we'll
just
have
it
covered
under
CFR
a
and
then
and
then
we'll
do
our
ordinance,
and
that
does
not
fly
with
us,
because
we'll
obviously
need
to
figure
out
things
before
that.
So
one
of
the
things
that
council
members
have
indicated
that
they
do
want
to
give
it
to
us
in
terms
of
administrating
things
that
obviously
they
have
not
voted
on
that.
C
But
they
have
indicated
that
in
comments
and
other
council
members
have
indicated
that
they
really
want
to
know
what
are
the
the
difference
points
between
the
C,
sfra
and
and
mobile
homes,
and
they
want
they.
They
have
indicated
ey
that
clarified,
instead
of
using
their
staff
time,
I
wanted
to
use
our
staff
time
and.
G
C
C
G
Was
just
on
the
work
plan,
I
mean
it's
just
a
quick
I'm
in
you
can
I
just
want
to
be
clear
because
it
talked
about
a
study
session
with
recommendations.
We
can
address
that,
but
I
wanted
to
make
clear.
Is
there
asked
the
question
of
is
the
expectation
that
this
body
would
actually
be
taking
an
action
to
be
reported
to
the
council
at
the
end
of
that
meeting
at
the
end
of
that
discussion
item
how
much
requirements.
C
G
A
couple
meetings
ago,
when
we
write
to
you
to
see
sfra
amendments,
you
took
sort
of
straw
vote,
but
you
did
take
a
vote
and
then
we
were
reported
to
the
council
that
you
know
there
was.
You
know
in
a
minute
unanimity
if
they
are
HC
on
a
variety
of
items.
So
I
just
think
it's
helpful
for
staff
to
have
clarity
on
what
we
would
be
bringing
forth
and
how
we
would
have
Jen
ties
it.
It's
really
the
issue
so
I'm
supportive
of
having.
C
A
G
I
What
Emily
is
suggesting
is
we
know
it
might
not
go
into
this
year's
every,
but
the
rental
housing
committee
would
still
like
to
make
recommendations
to
the
City
Council
if
they
were
to
adopt
an
ordinance,
because
most
likely,
the
rental
housing
committee
needs
to
then
start
implementing
whatever
the
City
Council
is
adopting
as
an
ordinance.
So
why
not
provide
input
proactively?
A
How
much
what's
the
likely
amount
of
time
at
that
like
that,
so
I
know,
there's
a
deadline
for
when
the
language
needs
to
go
into
the
ballot
measure.
You
know
if
they
were
to
exclude
mobile
homes
from
specifically
or
explicitly
exclude
them.
Then
the
timing
on
a
ballot
measure
discussion
have
they
talked
any
about
about
that
at
the
City
Council
you
made
a
mobile
home
well,
I
think
the
the.
G
A
A
For
order
of
operations,
I
think
I
guess
the
question
is
as
as
has
been
done
before
by
the
subcommittee
asking
for
clarification
or
input
from
us.
I
guess:
I
wonder
from
your
side,
if
there's
any
effect
that
putting
this
on
are
pre-empting
that
with
any
of
our
action
now,
as
opposed
to
waiting
for
City
Council
to
get
to
guide
that
process,
no
I
mean.
G
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
I
could
be
wrong,
but
I
don't
think
that
the
subcommittee
actually
will
take
on
the
mobile
home
we're
in
control.
The
subcommittee
was
tasked
with
the
C
sfra
amendments.
I,
don't
know
whether
the
council
will
appoint
a
different
subcommittee
for
mobile
homes.
You
know
I
think
is
Vice
Chair
Rahm
has
pointed
out.
B
A
B
C
Concern
with
that,
I
am
okay,
that
once
we
do
the
study
session,
we
can't
come
up
with
that.
We
can't
come
to
a
sort
of
consensus.
I
am
accepting
of
that.
I
am
NOT
as
accepting.
If
we
do
come
up
with
some
sort
of
consensus
that
we
can't
actually
make
the
recommendation
from
there.
So
how
can?
How
can
we
make
this
work
on
that?
Well,
you
don't
have
to
accept
that.
Okay.
I
I
C
C
C
C
E
C
A
A
G
A
All
opposed,
nay,
okay,
all
right.
Thank
you,
I
think.
My
comment
is
just
that.
There's
a
lot
of
balls
near
right
now,
so
you
know
I
think
I
think
city
council
has,
and
the
subcommittee
so
far
has
been
diligent
and
asking
for
our
feedback
and
then
we've
we've
had
a
very
quick
turnaround
so
again
for
Anki.
You
know
she
puts
on
the
next
agenda
for
us
to
make
a
recommendation
and
summarizes
with
staff.
Everything
that's
been
asked.
So
in
my
view
you
know
I
I
wouldn't
want.
A
C
C
A
J
Staff
announcements
updates
requests
and
committee
reports,
including
our
monthly
status
report,
which
is
also
available
online.
This
is
not
our
quarterly
update,
so
this
will
be
a
very
brief
overview.
Just
touching
on
some
of
the
major
changes
that
we've
seen.
Actually,
everything
has
been
pretty
stable
and
consistent,
we're
receiving
just
as
much
information
requests
and
contact
as
we
have
in
the
past.
J
It's
even
a
little
bit
higher
compared
to
last
time
this
year,
this
time
last
year
and
for
our
petitions
we
are
doing
great
at
settling
them
out
and
getting
them
moving
through
the
process
quickly.
This
year,
as
I
mentioned
before,
we
do
have
at
least
one
for
sure
more,
like
three
potentially
for
landlord
housing
provider.
Petitions
coming
our
way,
so
those
numbers
may
change,
keep
tuned.
J
The
vacancy
rate
is
holding
pretty
steady
right
now,
so
are
the
average
effective
rents
for
units
built
before
1995?
They
have
had
a
slight
jump
and
keep
in
mind
that
this
is
what
is
currently
being
asked,
not
what
people
are
paying
if
they
are
in
their
unit.
We
don't
have
a
current
way
to
track
that
for
termination
notices,
we
had
one
which
all
from
market
that
went
through
this
past
quarter
for
a
hundred
and
fifteen
units,
and
we
received
one
breach
of
lease
for
tenants.
We
also
wanted
to
note
that
even.
D
J
J
This
is
something
to
note.
We
have
changed
our
last
two
workshops
for
the
year.
Instead
of
having
two
separate
workshops
addressing
challenging
living,
and/or
housing
provider
situations,
we
have
switched
that
to
now
be
one
workshop.
Now,
it's
combined
and
welcome
all
are
welcome
for
that.
One
workshop
coming
up
next
week
on
November
14th
right
here
at
the
Plaza
and
we've
done
that
so
that
we
could
also
have
a
December
12th
workshop,
focused
on
that
new
14.
J
Maybe
14
82,
rent
stabilization
in
Just,
Cause
protections,
statewide
law
and
hopefully
answer
some
of
the
questions
that
tenants
have
regarding
that
and
that
property
owners
have.
Regarding
that.
So
keep
that
in
mind
ready
again.
They
are
right
here
in
Plaza
and
start
at
6:30
on
those
dates.
Any
questions
for
staff
I
have
a
quick
question.
Actually.
B
J
And
very
well
trained
mediators
who
actually
trains.
The
mediators
come
and
do
the
presentation
with
us
and
for
us
at
that
meeting
so
they'll
be
giving
tips
and
ideas
on
how
best
to
work
through
challenging
situations.
For
instance,
if
you're
a
housing
provider
and
you
have
a
tenant
that
is
potentially
difficult
to
work
with,
you
will
receive
input
and
insight
into
that
unique
situation.
J
J
B
J
Cereals
on
1482,
because
we're
already
receiving
questions
on
it,
so
we
thought
it
would
be
good
to
help
housing
providers
and
tenants
understand
more
of
what's
happening.
Statewide.
We
already
provide
information
about
state
laws
in
a
lot
of
our
workshops,
and
so
this
is
a
perfect
opportunity
for
us
to
help
clarify
what
we
can
do
as
an
office
and
what
we're
restricted
from
doing
as
an
office
as
well.
Thank
you
great.
C
C
I
had
the
opportunity
to
go
to
the
June
12,
where
it's
really
tiny
on
the
screen,
but
I
think
this
goes
towards
a
committee
committee.
Member
of
honey's
question.
We
they
went
over
your
tenant
rights,
I
guess
in
the
May
16th
they
went
over
the
landlord
rights
under
all
levels
of
government
because,
generally,
what
happens
is
the
perfect
person
shows
up
and
like
I,
have
no
idea
if
I'm
covered
under
whatever,
and
we
were
like
okay,
this
one's
this
is
your
federal
races
or
your
state
race.
C
That
could
ease
later
is
that
now
I'm
sure,
but
we
I
went
to
the
celebration
of
leaders
and
fun
little
activity,
they
fed
us
good
food
and
it
was
at
the
community
center
committee
member,
oh
honey,
was
there
with
me:
we
got
certificate
signed
by
the
mayor.
It
was
nice
and
provided
an
update
on
our
committee
activities,
all
all
commissions
and
boards
do
that
an
annual
update,
it's
really
more
of
a
fun
thing.
I,
don't
think
people
actually
paid
attention
to
the
report,
but
but
it
was,
it
was
a
fun
event.