The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

6 22-0542 Subject: Submit Amendments To The Just Cause For Eviction Ordinance To The November 8, 2022 General Election From: Councilmembers Kalb And Fife Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution On The City Council's Own Motion Submitting To The Voters At The November 8, 2022, General Municipal Election, An Ordinance To Amend Oakland Municipal Code Section 8.22.300 Et Seq. (Just Cause For Eviction Ordinance) To: (1) Extend Eviction Protections To Tenants In Vehicular Residential Facilities And Newly Constructed Rental Units, Except Accessory Dwelling Units During The First Ten Years; (2) Remove Failure To Execute A Lease Extension As Grounds For Eviction; (3) Prohibit No-Fault Evictions Of Educators And Children During The School Year; And (4) Make Other Clarifying Amendments; And Directing The City Clerk To Fix The Date For Submission Of Arguments And Provide For Notice And Publication, And Take Any And All Actions Necessary Under Law To Prepare For And Conduct The November 8, 2022, General Municipal Election

  • Default_avatar
    Lauren Chiarulli over 2 years ago

    As a tenant in Oakland, I strongly support the expansion of just cause eviction protections. Please include ADUs in these protections. Everyone who follows the terms in their lease should have the ability to maintain stable housing.

  • 10213915440782267
    Tony Toppano over 2 years ago

    This ballot measure is not needed. Oakland has very strict eviction ordinance already. Vehicles should not be part of our rent adjustment program due to the health and safety issues associated with them.

  • Default_avatar
    Allan Leong over 2 years ago

    I strongly oppose this. This measure further discourages the creation on new housing in Oakland.

  • Default_avatar
    Tuan Anh over 2 years ago

    This proposal would hurt construction of new apartments and ADUs which we need to alleviate the housing crisis. It would also hurt local jobs and blue collar workers who are helping produce more housing in Oakland.

    Besides hindering new housing, this harmful proposal also encourages RVs which are littering the streets in Oakland, inviting out-of-town drug addicts to move into the flatlands and adding to our homeless crisis.

    The pubic should have been provided opportunities to weigh in on all these items in committee. So many things wrong with this legislation which is being snuck-in after the busy July 4th holiday weekend. We need more transparency in public policy.

    Very harmful consequences, please vote NO!

  • Default_avatar
    Chris Moore over 2 years ago

    I strongly oppose the proposed amendments to Just Cause. This legislation only serves to reduce the supply of housing in Oakland. Council should focus on increasing housing. This legislation in particular will reduce the number of ADU's and will reduce new development in the City. Vote no on this bad policy.

  • Default_avatar
    Michael Gabriel over 2 years ago

    I oppose the proposed amendments to the Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance and do not want them included in the General Election. If there were no laws against stealing, stores could not provide service. The Just Cause regulations serve that function for housing providers. The proposed changes to the Just Cause ordinance weaken it. The proposed changes should be considered individually so healthy discussions of pros and cons can be conducted. Combining them is confusing and a disservice.

    Vehicular residential facilities have increased substantially. Fires, leaks and complaints from neighbors have also increased. Applying rules originally created for residential facilities won't work and need need study. There will be situations where eviction is necessary.

    Impediments to development of new housing such as is proposed will result in less new housing construction and more unhoused citizens.

    There are many circumstances and situations that create the need unwanted moves. Legislation should not attempt to regulate every possibility. A firefighter might not want to move during fire season, nor a politician during election season. Protections for educators and households with children aren’t fair to others. Adequate tenant notification of the sale of a rental home is reasonable.

  • Default_avatar
    Celeste Goyer over 2 years ago

    The Casita Coalition is a statewide nonprofit working to encourage small housing as a solution for more equitable, inclusive neighborhoods. ADUs are a unique form of housing. When they are built by homeowners in a shared yard or attached to the primary residence, the renter and homeowner live very near each other. We strongly suggest exempting ADUs on properties where the owner lives on site. Including this type of rental in this ordinance would impose significant cost burdens, security risk and loss of flexibility--particularly for older, lower-income residents planning an ADU to help them navigate urgent life issues. Imposing these costs and restrictions on this type of rental we believe will result in a major reduction of new ADUs built in Oakland--which will be a loss of new affordable housing for the city. Currently, the majority of ADUs in Oakland are affordable to lower income renters, with an average rent of $1112/mo. Please exempt this category of ADU property from the ordinance and let this housing form continue to help Oakland residents better afford their homes and age in place. Thank you.

  • Default_avatar
    J Johnson over 2 years ago

    I strongly support this proposal to expand and improve the City's Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance

  • Headshot_square
    Emily Wheeler over 2 years ago

    I strongly support this proposal to expand and improve the City's Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance and I urge City Council NOT to exempt ADUs from just cause protections!

  • Default_avatar
    Michael Trujillo over 2 years ago

    As a low-income tenant in a rent stabilized rental unit in Oakland City Council District 1, I strongly support this proposal to expand and improve the City's Just Cause for Eviction (JCE) Ordinance. The housing crisis that existed when the JCE Ordinance was first approved by the City’s voters in 2002 has not abated, and displacement pressures are stronger now than ever before given the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on low-income tenants. Oakland needs to strengthen the JCE Ordinance, expand the units to which it applies, and provide its benefits to more tenants, not fewer. To this end, I urge Council not to exempt ADUs from coverage under the JCE Ordinance. The state has incentivized creation of ADUs to alleviate the housing crisis, but exempting ADUs from just cause undercuts sustainable housing efforts. Sound public policy favors protecting as many of our neighbors as possible to keep Oakland tenants and families housed and in our community.