2 22-0377 Subject: Ordinance To Modify The CPI Rent Adjustment
From: Councilmember Fife
Recommendation: Adopt An Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.22 Of The Oakland Municipal Code (Residential Rent Adjustments And Evictions) To (1) Make The Annual Permissible Rent Increase For Covered Units 60% Of The Percentage Increase In The Consumer Price Index Or 3%, Whichever Is Lower And (2) Align Annual Adjustment Period With State Law
I’m a 10 year resident of Oakland (District 3) and support Councilmember Fife’s ordinance to change the rent increase formula to 60% of CPI increase, or 3% in any year, whichever is lower. The current proposed increase of 6.7% is unprecedented and completely misaligned with the ongoing financial challenges of many renters here, including public sector workers like me. Many Oakland renters are still reeling from the devastating economic effects of Covid (still ongoing). Other Bay Area cities already cap the allowable rent increase (SF 60% of CPI and Berkeley 65% of CPI), and it makes sense for Oakland renters to receive similar protections.
Thanks,
Timothy
My name is Andrew M. and I am a resident here in Oakland (District 1) and I also work here in Oakland at a nonprofit. I strongly support the legislation to cap the annual permissible rent increase to the lower of 60% of CPI or 3%. Housing is a human right and is a racial and social justice issue here, as rising costs have pushed out low-income folks of color and other communities struggling to get by. While there are some good people out there who own buildings, there are more people out there that just see dollar signs and not human beings. Please support this legislation!
I support Councilmember Fife's ordinance to cap annual rent increases. As a lifelong Oakland resident, I've been stunned and dismayed by the rising cost of rent in our city. Oakland's rents are already out of control, and this unprecedented annual increase is a recipe for eviction that will force even more people to go unhoused in our city. Thank you.
To whom it may concern / Oakland Councilmember Fife,
I vote "NO" on changing the formula to the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustments.
My brother and I are the minority owners of a 5 unit apartment building in east Oakland. My father sacrificed his life at the early age of 64 to provide for his family. With that being said, our rents have always been under market, well kept units, that are a safe environment for the tenants. We too experiance "the draconian eviction moratorium".
With the rising cost of: property taxes, labor, maintenance, utilities, Insurance, etc., it's definitely been a challenge to earn a profit. The city already passed "Measure W", which forced a lot of property owners to sell their families legacy. It's the "slum lords" that make it bad for the housing providers, as well as the many tenants who breach lease.
I find it "Outrageous", as well as "Repulsive".
This issue should be evaluated on a case to case basis. How is this fair for "ALL" property owners? This clearly has not been thought out all the way. I'm sure that the city can come up with an alternative, but not like this.
After living in Oakland for the past 6 years I recently purchased a multifamily home in Oakland and I strongly oppose this measure. The home I purchased is an older victorian built in the 1890s and as such it takes a lot to maintain the property and those prices have only been increasing along with insurance and taxes given the recent purchase value of the property. I believe in these multi-family buildings being very important for communities and regulations like the RAP proposal put forth by Council Member Fife are exactly things that kill housing like this. Oakland continues to be one of the only places in California that has a blanket eviction moratorium due to COVID while all other COVID policies and restrictions across the state and federal level have been lifted. This proposed change adds insult to injury during an already difficult time. The only solution to prevent displacement is to build more housing and make it cheaper for landlords to do the right things by easing permitting restrictions and fees and making more programs that encourage more units to be added to existing buildings. Let’s not fool ourselves in thinking that artificially pinning rent lower will solve our problems. This will actively hurt not only landlords but tenants who will receive sub par service from landlords who are strapped due to restrictions on rent increases.
The City of Oakland is showing bad faith in unilaterally breaking a 20-year agreement between tenant advocacy groups, housing providers and the City. The average rent adjustment for the last 19 years is 2.4%, way below average inflation. The longstanding covenant should not be lightly dismissed because of the result of a single year’s rate of inflation. This is an aberration. If the council wants to change a 20 year agreement, the RIGHT WAY to do it is to invite all interested parties back to the table to renegotiate in good faith.
The city needs to honor its agreements and support Small Moms and Pops with concrete actions. Providing housing is hard to do. Basic home maintenance items have drastically increased due to pandemic supply chain disruptions. Plywood increased from $15.99 to $48.95 (306%!). A branch subfeed circuit breaker that normally goes for $102 is no available in store. I had to buy it online for $409.69 (402% increase!). Many residents have not received rent for months or years with the moratorium.
I have rented in Oakland for decades and have deep ties and contributions to community groups here, but no family. Were the CPI rent adjustment changed I might be unable to pay my rent at this time. Please leave the CPI rent adjustment percentage as it is. Thank you.
Dear Councilmember-
My wife and I own two old buildings in Oakland, a Triplex built in 1918 and a single family home built in 1889. Both are rented out and both are expensive to maintain. The current rent control ordinance makes maintaining older buildings in Oakland difficult enough, further changes to restrict rents below the rate of inflation will make it that much more difficult to continue. Carpenters, plumbers, electricians, and roofers are all raising their rates at the CPI. Wood, pipe, copper wire and roofing materials are all increasing at the CPI. Mortgage rates are up by 80% in the last 12 months. If you want to see the housing stock in Oakland deteriorate, vote for councilmember Fife's motion. If you want the housing stock to be maintained vote against it. If you want more housing in Oakland, eliminate rent control. All economists, including Nobel Prize winning Paul Krugman, agree on this. "The analysis of rent control is among the best-understood issues in all of economics, and -- among economists, anyway -- one of the least controversial. In 1992 a poll of the American Economic Association found 93 percent of its members agreeing that ''a ceiling on rents reduces the quality and quantity of housing.'' https://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-affair.html
I am a local landlord providing housing in city of Oakland to renters. I am writing this to plead with you and to urge you to please vote NO on making changes to the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustments. It has been very coming on close to impossible to provide housing with our investment that we've put so much into and will now stand the risk of loosing our home. With the proposed limit it would crush our ability to continue to provide affordable housing for renters. This is because there has been a non stop increase in fees and costs for owning a home and due to costs increasing due to Covid and the tragedy in Ukraine.
To disallow the ability to to adjust but still increase our costs of insurance, maintenance, and stressful and increased risk from tenants who don’t pay rent this would push us into not being able to keep our investment that we have invested so much time and money into.
These policies have consistently attacked our livelihood and assaulted our mental well-being for years.
It is horrific and offensive to see that the city of Oakland would consider further limiting our ability to recoup expenses for our housing services after two years of forcing us to provide housing for little-to-no compensation under the eviction moratorium.
This proposal is further evidence that this city does not value its housing providers, their hard earned investments. Please reject Council Member Fife’s soulless and UN-thoughtout proposal.
I am urging you to vote NO on the amendment to cap rent increases at 3%. As a small landlord we are already feeling the burden of increases in property taxes, water, waste management, property insurance. All our costs are rising exponentially, including skyrocketing costs for repairs and maintenance. We just paid $48,000 for a roof on our 4-plex (usually a $32,000 job, but lumber prices have soared). There are already limits on rent increases. Some years as low as 0.7%. Everything all around us is going up, cost of labor, utilities, maintenance, taxes, this unreasonable cap would make it impossible for us to provide rental housing in Oakland. I should add, my tenants make more money than I do! This would place an unfair burden on small business owners (landlords).
I fully support Council Member Fife's ordinance to change Oakland’s annual permissible rent increase to be based on 60% of the CPI, not 100%. The rent increase scheduled to begin July 1st is untenable. Making this change will align Oakland with similar policies in Berkeley and San Francisco to avoid exacerbating an already devastating housing crisis.
Please vote "NO" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
The existing forumula was created through a coming together of community stakeholders. Please honor the covenant that James Vann advocated for on behalf of Oakland Tenants Union and stakeholders shook hands on. This forumula wasn't pulled out of thin air. It's based on inflationary costs of goods and services to maintain the residences in proper living conditions. Plumbers, electricians, carpenters, cost of materials, PG&E, Waste Management are real costs. These goods and services do not cap at 3%. In fact, inflation has been over 8% this year. How do you expect buildings to be maintained, when you cap rent adjustements at a third of the inflationary costs of goods and services? Dilapidated buildings throughout Oakland. That is the direction we are heading, when you cap at a fraction of inflation. Please maintain the agreement that a community of diverse stakeholders agreed to. Vote "No" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
Are you going to cap annual increases in expenses like insurance, utilities, labor and material? This is completely ridiculous. Oakland already makes it very onerous for property owners to operate apartment buildings. Now you are proposing artificial caps on revenue while doing nothing about reducing expenses. Your short sighted attempts to garner votes will create far reaching ramifications when landlords stop investing in their apartments and the housing stock deteriorates. Eventually only bad actors will remain. You need to understand and follow basic economics - focus on policies making it easier to increase inventory and build the housing stock in Oakland.
Please vote "NO" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
For the past two years tenants have been staying home more, which has caused a greater wear and tear on properties and has greatly increased repair costs and service costs. Additionally, the taxes have increased as well as insurance premiums and vandalism. I have had to replace a whole mailbox costing thousands of dollars alone due to extensive mail theft and attempted break-ins.
Landlords have been affected by the pandemic as well and it is unjust to continue to bear the burden while also claiming to value our partnerships and understand our plight. This proposal is further evidence that this city does not value its housing providers.
Please consider the barrage of regulations we have endured and reject Councilmember Fife’s proposal.
I am a senior citizen woman and sole owner of a housing building in Oakland since 1985. I work for my income. I scrub floors and wash windows, hard work to earn my income. Based on the past 30 years, I verify to you: 1) The costs of operating housing INCREASES with inflation every year, and 2) I have never had a tenant leave because the rent was too high! Carol Fife's Agenda Report (page 4, paragraphs 1 and 2) incapsulates the core of the proposal AND demonstrates a lack of understanding. She incorrectly omits the fact: Owner’s take the hit, too!
- Owner’s also pay “exorbitant amount to gas, food, and other expenses”
- Owner’s operating expenses DO increase at the rate of inflation
- Owner’s also have “limited income.”
Face the Facts - Please vote NO. Thank you.
Please vote "NO" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
Landlord's costs go up with inflation and they need to be able to adjust the rents to keep the units in good condition. These policies starve housing providers from the cash needed to keep the units in good condition.
Oakland's economy is booming and unemployment is at an all-time low. The pandemic is over. There is really no precedent for changing this policy right now. No to mention, landlords are still unable to apply any banked rent increases right now anyways, so tenants are ALREADY seeing extra rent-increase limitations due to the unfair "local emergency"
I have lived and worked in the Bay Area for 32 years. After renting in San Francisco for 18 years and watching most of my friends leave because they could no longer afford to live here, I too was finally priced out of SF and moved to Oakland 14 years ago. I am so grateful that I moved when I did and that I was able to find a rent controlled apartment, because even though I make a pretty decent salary, I could not afford to live here if I were to move here today.
I strongly support council member Fife's ordinance, and bringing Oakland in line with our neighboring cities in terms of calculation of allowable rent increases. Rents are already too high in Oakland and we have too many folks already who are housing insecure. Additionally, salaries have not increased in the way that everything else has. I urge you to vote yes and pass this legislation and protect Oakland’s most vulnerable citizens.
I’m a 10 year resident of Oakland (District 3) and support Councilmember Fife’s ordinance to change the rent increase formula to 60% of CPI increase, or 3% in any year, whichever is lower. The current proposed increase of 6.7% is unprecedented and completely misaligned with the ongoing financial challenges of many renters here, including public sector workers like me. Many Oakland renters are still reeling from the devastating economic effects of Covid (still ongoing). Other Bay Area cities already cap the allowable rent increase (SF 60% of CPI and Berkeley 65% of CPI), and it makes sense for Oakland renters to receive similar protections.
Thanks,
Timothy
Hi there,
My name is Andrew M. and I am a resident here in Oakland (District 1) and I also work here in Oakland at a nonprofit. I strongly support the legislation to cap the annual permissible rent increase to the lower of 60% of CPI or 3%. Housing is a human right and is a racial and social justice issue here, as rising costs have pushed out low-income folks of color and other communities struggling to get by. While there are some good people out there who own buildings, there are more people out there that just see dollar signs and not human beings. Please support this legislation!
Thank you,
Andrew
I support Councilmember Fife's ordinance to cap annual rent increases. As a lifelong Oakland resident, I've been stunned and dismayed by the rising cost of rent in our city. Oakland's rents are already out of control, and this unprecedented annual increase is a recipe for eviction that will force even more people to go unhoused in our city. Thank you.
At 6.7%, my rent will increase by $113/mo. I work for $16.25/hr, where is this money coming from?
Eve Aruguete
Oakland 94606
To whom it may concern / Oakland Councilmember Fife,
I vote "NO" on changing the formula to the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustments.
My brother and I are the minority owners of a 5 unit apartment building in east Oakland. My father sacrificed his life at the early age of 64 to provide for his family. With that being said, our rents have always been under market, well kept units, that are a safe environment for the tenants. We too experiance "the draconian eviction moratorium".
With the rising cost of: property taxes, labor, maintenance, utilities, Insurance, etc., it's definitely been a challenge to earn a profit. The city already passed "Measure W", which forced a lot of property owners to sell their families legacy. It's the "slum lords" that make it bad for the housing providers, as well as the many tenants who breach lease.
I find it "Outrageous", as well as "Repulsive".
This issue should be evaluated on a case to case basis. How is this fair for "ALL" property owners? This clearly has not been thought out all the way. I'm sure that the city can come up with an alternative, but not like this.
I strongly urge you to "Please" reconsider.
Respectfully,
DC
Dear Council Members,
After living in Oakland for the past 6 years I recently purchased a multifamily home in Oakland and I strongly oppose this measure. The home I purchased is an older victorian built in the 1890s and as such it takes a lot to maintain the property and those prices have only been increasing along with insurance and taxes given the recent purchase value of the property. I believe in these multi-family buildings being very important for communities and regulations like the RAP proposal put forth by Council Member Fife are exactly things that kill housing like this. Oakland continues to be one of the only places in California that has a blanket eviction moratorium due to COVID while all other COVID policies and restrictions across the state and federal level have been lifted. This proposed change adds insult to injury during an already difficult time. The only solution to prevent displacement is to build more housing and make it cheaper for landlords to do the right things by easing permitting restrictions and fees and making more programs that encourage more units to be added to existing buildings. Let’s not fool ourselves in thinking that artificially pinning rent lower will solve our problems. This will actively hurt not only landlords but tenants who will receive sub par service from landlords who are strapped due to restrictions on rent increases.
Please vote no on this proposal.
The City of Oakland is showing bad faith in unilaterally breaking a 20-year agreement between tenant advocacy groups, housing providers and the City. The average rent adjustment for the last 19 years is 2.4%, way below average inflation. The longstanding covenant should not be lightly dismissed because of the result of a single year’s rate of inflation. This is an aberration. If the council wants to change a 20 year agreement, the RIGHT WAY to do it is to invite all interested parties back to the table to renegotiate in good faith.
The city needs to honor its agreements and support Small Moms and Pops with concrete actions. Providing housing is hard to do. Basic home maintenance items have drastically increased due to pandemic supply chain disruptions. Plywood increased from $15.99 to $48.95 (306%!). A branch subfeed circuit breaker that normally goes for $102 is no available in store. I had to buy it online for $409.69 (402% increase!). Many residents have not received rent for months or years with the moratorium.
I have rented in Oakland for decades and have deep ties and contributions to community groups here, but no family. Were the CPI rent adjustment changed I might be unable to pay my rent at this time. Please leave the CPI rent adjustment percentage as it is. Thank you.
Dear Councilmember-
My wife and I own two old buildings in Oakland, a Triplex built in 1918 and a single family home built in 1889. Both are rented out and both are expensive to maintain. The current rent control ordinance makes maintaining older buildings in Oakland difficult enough, further changes to restrict rents below the rate of inflation will make it that much more difficult to continue. Carpenters, plumbers, electricians, and roofers are all raising their rates at the CPI. Wood, pipe, copper wire and roofing materials are all increasing at the CPI. Mortgage rates are up by 80% in the last 12 months. If you want to see the housing stock in Oakland deteriorate, vote for councilmember Fife's motion. If you want the housing stock to be maintained vote against it. If you want more housing in Oakland, eliminate rent control. All economists, including Nobel Prize winning Paul Krugman, agree on this. "The analysis of rent control is among the best-understood issues in all of economics, and -- among economists, anyway -- one of the least controversial. In 1992 a poll of the American Economic Association found 93 percent of its members agreeing that ''a ceiling on rents reduces the quality and quantity of housing.'' https://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-affair.html
Dear Oakland City Council,
I am a local landlord providing housing in city of Oakland to renters. I am writing this to plead with you and to urge you to please vote NO on making changes to the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustments. It has been very coming on close to impossible to provide housing with our investment that we've put so much into and will now stand the risk of loosing our home. With the proposed limit it would crush our ability to continue to provide affordable housing for renters. This is because there has been a non stop increase in fees and costs for owning a home and due to costs increasing due to Covid and the tragedy in Ukraine.
To disallow the ability to to adjust but still increase our costs of insurance, maintenance, and stressful and increased risk from tenants who don’t pay rent this would push us into not being able to keep our investment that we have invested so much time and money into.
These policies have consistently attacked our livelihood and assaulted our mental well-being for years.
It is horrific and offensive to see that the city of Oakland would consider further limiting our ability to recoup expenses for our housing services after two years of forcing us to provide housing for little-to-no compensation under the eviction moratorium.
This proposal is further evidence that this city does not value its housing providers, their hard earned investments. Please reject Council Member Fife’s soulless and UN-thoughtout proposal.
I oppose this. Fair is fair. Everyone is dealing with inflation.
I am urging you to vote NO on the amendment to cap rent increases at 3%. As a small landlord we are already feeling the burden of increases in property taxes, water, waste management, property insurance. All our costs are rising exponentially, including skyrocketing costs for repairs and maintenance. We just paid $48,000 for a roof on our 4-plex (usually a $32,000 job, but lumber prices have soared). There are already limits on rent increases. Some years as low as 0.7%. Everything all around us is going up, cost of labor, utilities, maintenance, taxes, this unreasonable cap would make it impossible for us to provide rental housing in Oakland. I should add, my tenants make more money than I do! This would place an unfair burden on small business owners (landlords).
I fully support Council Member Fife's ordinance to change Oakland’s annual permissible rent increase to be based on 60% of the CPI, not 100%. The rent increase scheduled to begin July 1st is untenable. Making this change will align Oakland with similar policies in Berkeley and San Francisco to avoid exacerbating an already devastating housing crisis.
Please vote "NO" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
The existing forumula was created through a coming together of community stakeholders. Please honor the covenant that James Vann advocated for on behalf of Oakland Tenants Union and stakeholders shook hands on. This forumula wasn't pulled out of thin air. It's based on inflationary costs of goods and services to maintain the residences in proper living conditions. Plumbers, electricians, carpenters, cost of materials, PG&E, Waste Management are real costs. These goods and services do not cap at 3%. In fact, inflation has been over 8% this year. How do you expect buildings to be maintained, when you cap rent adjustements at a third of the inflationary costs of goods and services? Dilapidated buildings throughout Oakland. That is the direction we are heading, when you cap at a fraction of inflation. Please maintain the agreement that a community of diverse stakeholders agreed to. Vote "No" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
Are you going to cap annual increases in expenses like insurance, utilities, labor and material? This is completely ridiculous. Oakland already makes it very onerous for property owners to operate apartment buildings. Now you are proposing artificial caps on revenue while doing nothing about reducing expenses. Your short sighted attempts to garner votes will create far reaching ramifications when landlords stop investing in their apartments and the housing stock deteriorates. Eventually only bad actors will remain. You need to understand and follow basic economics - focus on policies making it easier to increase inventory and build the housing stock in Oakland.
Please vote "NO" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
For the past two years tenants have been staying home more, which has caused a greater wear and tear on properties and has greatly increased repair costs and service costs. Additionally, the taxes have increased as well as insurance premiums and vandalism. I have had to replace a whole mailbox costing thousands of dollars alone due to extensive mail theft and attempted break-ins.
Landlords have been affected by the pandemic as well and it is unjust to continue to bear the burden while also claiming to value our partnerships and understand our plight. This proposal is further evidence that this city does not value its housing providers.
Please consider the barrage of regulations we have endured and reject Councilmember Fife’s proposal.
I am a senior citizen woman and sole owner of a housing building in Oakland since 1985. I work for my income. I scrub floors and wash windows, hard work to earn my income. Based on the past 30 years, I verify to you: 1) The costs of operating housing INCREASES with inflation every year, and 2) I have never had a tenant leave because the rent was too high! Carol Fife's Agenda Report (page 4, paragraphs 1 and 2) incapsulates the core of the proposal AND demonstrates a lack of understanding. She incorrectly omits the fact: Owner’s take the hit, too!
- Owner’s also pay “exorbitant amount to gas, food, and other expenses”
- Owner’s operating expenses DO increase at the rate of inflation
- Owner’s also have “limited income.”
Face the Facts - Please vote NO. Thank you.
Please vote "NO" on changing the formula for the Oakland Residential Rent Adjustment.
Landlord's costs go up with inflation and they need to be able to adjust the rents to keep the units in good condition. These policies starve housing providers from the cash needed to keep the units in good condition.
Oakland's economy is booming and unemployment is at an all-time low. The pandemic is over. There is really no precedent for changing this policy right now. No to mention, landlords are still unable to apply any banked rent increases right now anyways, so tenants are ALREADY seeing extra rent-increase limitations due to the unfair "local emergency"
OPPOSE THIS MEASURE - VOTE NO
Dear Council members,
I have lived and worked in the Bay Area for 32 years. After renting in San Francisco for 18 years and watching most of my friends leave because they could no longer afford to live here, I too was finally priced out of SF and moved to Oakland 14 years ago. I am so grateful that I moved when I did and that I was able to find a rent controlled apartment, because even though I make a pretty decent salary, I could not afford to live here if I were to move here today.
I strongly support council member Fife's ordinance, and bringing Oakland in line with our neighboring cities in terms of calculation of allowable rent increases. Rents are already too high in Oakland and we have too many folks already who are housing insecure. Additionally, salaries have not increased in the way that everything else has. I urge you to vote yes and pass this legislation and protect Oakland’s most vulnerable citizens.
Thank you.
尊敬的市議會成員：
請對更改屋崙住宅租金公式調整投反對票。作為一名小業主，我們的成本不断上升，此方案通過，使我們很困難继續确保维持房屋水準和住客安全。