Mark Leno’s Ellis Act reform bill (SB1439) was amended so only San Francisco tenants will be protected if the law passes. Yet tenants all over California are rallying to support long-time renters who face a dire situation in San Francisco, so the bill passed the state Senate and is now in the Assembly. It goes to the Housing and Community Development Committee on Wednesday.
The Berkeley Rent Board voted in March to ask Loni Hancock and Nancy Skinner to work to amend the bill so it protects East Bay renters. The Board will get an update from the legislative advocates on Monday June 16 on this and other state legislation.
There were no Ellis evictions filed in Berkeley from 2011 through 2013. The Rent Board gives a report once a year, but tenant advocates have told the Tenants Union that there are many renters in Berkeley threatened with Ellis evictions. When tenants leave without an official eviction, there is no statistical record.
Amended “Squatters Bill” Remains Threat to Renters
A bill in the state assembly intended to allow cities to evict squatters without going through a full eviction process in court could put any tenant without a written lease at risk of losing her or his access to the justice system. BTU worked to discourage our representatives in Sacramento to support the bill.
Recently, AB1513 was amended to only cover a couple places in Southern California, but if it is made law, it could set a dangerous precedent to allow the police to remove renters without the owner going to court.
On June 3, Berkeley City Council approved a recommendation from the Housing Advisory Commission to support AB 2175 (Daly). The bill calls for restoration and expansion of State Tax Assistance to Renters, particularly seniors, the disabled, and low-income folks. Council voted to send letters to State Senator Hancock, Assembly member Skinner, and Governor Brown to communicate the City of Berkeley’s support for AB 2175.
The Rent Board also voted in March to go on record supporting the bill, and will get an update on Monday June 16 from the legislative advocate.
Expanding Seismic Retrofit Requirements to Other Types of Buildings
In March, the Rent Board also voted to advise the City Council to review AB 2181, which would authorize cities to implement retrofit requirements on non-ductile concrete residential buildings by adding those structures to existing law regarding soft story buildings.
The Berkeley Rent Board voted at their March meeting to ask Senator Hancock and Representative Skinner to work on our behalf to allow cities like Berkeley to be a part of the statewide Ellis Reform. Meanwhile, the current bill from Mark Leno (SB 1439) – which will only protect San Francisco – narrowly passed the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee. Now it heads to the Judiciary. Although BTU wants protections against these speculative evictions to be open to Berkeley renters, we are still excited to see help for San Francisco may be on the way!
Tenants Together has published a fascinating report called The Speculator Loopholewith help from the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project. The report shows that more than half of the owners who want to “go out of the rental business” bought the property within one year of deciding to evict everyone. The Leno bill calls for owners to hold rental property for five years before they can “go out of business” with the Ellis Act – San Francisco hopes this will stop speculative evictions.
San Francisco also voted this week to increase relocation assistance for Ellis evictions: “On Tuesday, the Board of Supervisors voted 9-2 to approve legislation that requires property owners in such eviction situations to pay the difference between the tenant’s current rent and what the tenant would have to pay for a similar apartment under current market conditions for two years…a tenant who moved into a two-bedroom apartment in the Mission district in 1987 at a monthly rent of $909, a relocation payment of $44,832 would be required.” http://www.sfexaminer.com/PoliticsBlog/archives/2014/04/09/sf-boosts-compensation-for-ellis-act-evictees
Tenant Sues over Eviction for Air BnB “…case highlights an ongoing issue of Airbnb and other sites that allow people to rent out spare rooms or entire apartments to temporary visitors. Critics charge that the new sharing-economy services are so lucrative – and so laxly regulated – that they are forcing out residents and driving up rents by reducing the supply of available housing.” Airbnb profits prompted S.F (PDF)
Rich People Say the Darndest Things “The problem is that the world and this country should not talk about envy of the 1 percent. It should talk about emulating the 1 percent,” he said. “The 1 percent work harder. The 1 percent are much bigger factors in all forms of our society.” –Billionaire Sam Zell, who owns Equity Residential, now Berkeley’s Largest Landlord. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/05/sam-zell-1-percent_n_4733196.html
Consider the Source “For moderates like Mayor Ed Lee, appearing to get tough on the Ellis Act is an easy way to address voter discontent about affordability without having to wade into more controversial issues like housing density and planning reform.” http://www.modernluxury.com/san-francisco/story/the-eviction-crisis-wasnt
Class Action Lawsuit Against Central Valley’s Biggest Slumlord “When repairs are made, the complaint alleges, they are merely cosmetic and fail to address the health and safety issues, and JD Homes often retaliates against tenants who complain to authorities.” http://tenantstogether.org/article.php?id=2944
More on Tenant Displacement in San Francisco “There’s 50,600 proposed units of housing coming to San Francisco. Approximately 27,000 of these housing units have already been approved by officials, with 6,100 currently under construction. Most of the housing being built is “market rate,” meaning that it’s priced for those who can afford to spend roughly $36,000 a year on rent…The tech boom has conspired with rising housing prices to create an incredibly profitable incentive for landlords to push out low-income tenants and replace them with wealthy buyers, in spite of all the new units coming to market.” http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/02/13/san-franciscos-displacement-crisis/
Renters’ Day of ActionRally in SacramentoTenants-to-be on the State Capital StepsRenters March in SacramentoBerkeley Tenants UnionBTU to the RescueBTU visits legislators
Renters’ Day of Action Tuesday February 18 Click to download a PDF
Berkeley Tenants Union members will join with tenants from around the state in the first tenant March and Rally in Sacramento in many years.
On Tuesday February 18, Tenants Together is leading member organizations like BTU to the capital. BTU members and friends are invited to hop on a bus in the morning and return by about 1 PM to the East Bay. If you live in Berkeley, please email us for more information. Sign up directly on the Tenants Together website if you are not a Berkeley tenant.
With evictions in California’s larger cities creating panic among long-term renters, it is time for solidarity. State cuts to affordable housing threaten to have long-term impacts unless restored, and elimination of the renters’ rebate in state income taxes has left low-income senior and disabled tenants with less food on the table. These are the issues we will march to support on the Renters’ Day of Action.
Signing an online petition is not enough. Even writing to your state representatives is not enough. It’s time to take to the streets!
◘ Restore the Renter’s Rebate For Seniors and Disabled
In 2008 the Governor cut the Senior Citizens Renters Tax Assistance Program from the California budget. The program allowed disabled and senior tenants making less than $44,096 a tax rebate of about $300. Fixed income renters relied on this rebate.
State Bill 391 puts a fee on recording of real estate transactions – except home sales – which would generate $500 million a year to fund construction of housing for working people. California could use this money to leverage another $2.78 billion in federal assistance and bank loans to boost construction and create 29,000 jobs.
Speculators are misusing the state law to get around local tenant protections. In San Francisco, over 3,700 families have lost their homes through this type of eviction. This reform asks that local governments have more control over how Ellis evictions are carried out.
Berkeley is one of 14 cities in California that enjoys strong protections for tenants. San Francisco has decent protections, but has seen a huge wave of evictions that use a state law, the Ellis Act, to get around local rules.
Now there is a statewide effort to reform the Ellis Act. The law was intended to allow long-term owners to “go out of the rental business” but instead allows investment companies and other speculators to buy rent controlled buildings, evict all the tenants, and sell the units as condos or tenancies-in-common at huge profits.
Activists from San Diego to Redding are hoping a reformed law might require an owner to hold the building for at least five years before they could “go out of business” – this would eliminate speculators who buy rental properties only to flip them after evictions. However, in 2007 a bill in the California legislature which called for a five-year delay failed miserably. If a broad coalition from many cities – including Berkeley – doesn’t support the current reform, we could end up with a state exemption to the law that will only protect San Francisco.
And you know what they say – “When San Francisco sneezes, Berkeley get a cold!” If SF was able to curb their epidemic of evictions, speculators will quickly turn to Berkeley. This is why the Berkeley Tenants Union wants you to join with us in supporting broad statewide reform of the Ellis Act now!
Our friends at Tenants Together have put together a petition as a first step:
A state law, The Ellis Act, is responsible for the unfair eviction of thousands of seniors and families in California. In the past few years Ellis Act evictions have surged, with thousands of long-term tenants displaced from their homes.
San Francisco is taking other steps to end their eviction crisis – Berkeley should also increase Ellis relocation payments, restrict unit mergers, and give evicted residents priority for local affordable housing – join BTU to fight for this today! Right now, the revisions to the Berkeley Demolition Ordinance proposed by Mayor Bates will make it easier to eliminate rent controlled units by merging them to create big houses for the wealthy — the exact opposite of how San Francisco is changing their law! http://sfpublicpress.org/news/2013-12/supervisors-approve-plan-to-protect-tenants-against-displacement
Tenants Together has a Statewide Petition to Change the Ellis Act: “…then real estate speculators starting abusing the Ellis Act to turn a quick profit by evicting long-term tenants and selling the units. Ellis Act evictions are now surging. In San Francisco and Los Angeles in particular, thousands of rent-controlled tenants are being displaced by Ellis Act evictions.” – and Berkeley could be next! http://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5247/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=15820
Scenes like this will no longer be confined to Southside if revisions to the Demolition Ordinance allow destruction of small rental properties to build expensive commuter apartments.
DATE: November 5, 2013 TO: Planning Commissioners RE: Demolition Ordinance
SUMMARY: Please preserve affordable housing by again recommending the June 4 compromise on the Demolition Ordinance. Please find attached our petition — with 270 signatures.
Respected Planning Commissioners:
The Berkeley Tenants Union is extremely concerned about proposed changes to the demolition ordinance. As you may recall, you already approved changes to this zoning code in the spring. We think it might be a bit confusing that this law is before you once again, so we have tried to provide a comprehensive summary with links to all relevant documents in this correspondence.
In December of 2011, the Berkeley City Council directed staff to draft amended language to Berkeley Municipal Code Chapter 23C.08, the “Demolition and Elimination of Dwelling Units Ordinance.” (Document:Council Direction 12-6-11) In June of 2013, staff presented a draft that met all the requests Council made in 2011, and was approved by the Rent Board and the Planning Commission. The same draft has also been presented one month before, at the 4×4 Committee, and neither Mayor Bates nor Councilman Capitelli voiced any concerns with the draft. On June 4, it looked like Council was going to pass this compromise draft (Document: June 4 draft), until time ran out on the meeting.
Then something changed. The Council began to question the June 4 compromise, and considered a new draft, perhaps hastily prepared, presented at the July 2 Council meeting. (Document:July 2 Draft). The new draft appeared to be based on requests made by developer Equity Residential (Document:ER Letter to Council), who are now Berkeley’s largest landlord. Since Council got letters of objection from many civic groups, including the Sierra Club, Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, Berkeley Neighborhoods Council, and Berkeley Tenants Union, they sent the Ordinance back to the Planning Commission and the Housing Advisory Commission.
What do these drafts say?
Currently BMC 23C says “controlled rental units” cannot be eliminated unless the owner “cannot make a fair return on investment by maintaining the dwelling unit as a part of the rental housing market” and that those apartments must also be “seriously deteriorated beyond the conditions which might reasonably be expected due to normal use.” It also says that demolished rent controlled units must be replaced with permanently affordable housing. (Document: DemoCURRENT)
Problems with the current law arose because the City Attorney decided that empty units which would otherwise be under rent control are not “controlled rental units” and therefore not subject to the rules above. This means any empty unit can be torn down with no mitigation for the loss of affordable older units which would be under rent control if they were rented. Such a policy encourages owners to leave buildings to rot, promotes evictions and harassment, and may violate not only the Demolition law, but also the voter-approved Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance. (Document:NPO)
To end the controversy about the interpretation of the law, the Rent Board and the City Council called for revisions, but Council also asked that new rules require “units are replaced with an equal or greater number of new units inclusive of the current number of existing affordable units.” (Document: Council Direction 12-6-11) Likewise, the June 4 draft required developers who tear down multiunit buildings built before 1980 (those covered by rent control) replace them with “designated below-market rate units equal in number and comparable in size to the demolished units.”
However, the July and August drafts do not call for one-for-one replacement of affordable rent controlled units with housing for low-income renters. The July 2 and August 30 drafts both require developers pay a fee into the Housing Trust Fund. However, the fee in the July 2 draft is about 10% of what it costs to build an affordable unit, and the fee in the August 30 draft is unspecified and thus could be changed by City Council at any time. (Document:Worse Aug 30 draft)
There are numerous other problems with the July and August drafts. For example, one scheme outlined by developer Equity Residential was included in the July draft. This calls for replacement units in the new building which would be “designated rent increase restricted” – however, the Rent Board (Document:Berkeley Rent Board letter) and East Bay Community Law Center (Document:EBCLC Letter) have both pointed out that this violates the state law called Costa-Hawkins, because that law banned any new rent control in California, even if you call it by another name.
In addition, later drafts contradict the voter-approved Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance and may be challenged in court if they are made law. (Document:NPO)
Several community groups have sent communications on this issue that raise various additional concerns, such as the wisdom of tearing down perfectly fine small buildings at all, and the environmental impact of encouraging growth through demolition. You can find copies of public communications from The Sierra Club, Berkeley NAACP, Berkeley Neighborhoods Council, and Berkeley Architectural Heritage Assn. on our website along with all documents we have linked to in the text above.
The real question here is what kind of community benefits does Berkeley need in exchange for allowing speculators to tear down a useable rent controlled building in order to build a bigger one with market rate apartments? This is not just about what legal mitigations a nexus study might allow. We can actually choose, as Berkeley did in the 1970s, to ban demolition altogether. BTU hopes you might realize that rent control has been Berkeley’s most successful affordable housing program, and that rent controlled units should be preserved, even if they are not rented at this time.
You can choose not to allow demolition – and you should choose this if there is going to be a long wait for a Nexus study.
Please see the attached petition, with 270 signatures. Please note that, following pages with electronic signatures and comments, there are scans of the paper petitions.
Please again recommend the June 4 compromise draft.
Sincerely,
Berkeley Tenants Union Steering Committee, on behalf of the tenants of Berkeley
Date Change: Seismic Retrofits The Berkeley City Council vote on mandatory Seismic Retrofits for “soft story” buildings is now scheduled for Tuesday, November 19.
Thursday, October 10 at 5 PM Final Public Hearing on Seismic Retrofits
City of Berkeley Hearing sponsored by ASUC
UC Berkeley Alumni Hall: 2537 Haste Street
Currently, the plan is to allow landlords to pass costs onto tenants if the landlord can claim paying for the retrofit is a hardship. Since Rent Board rules already allow owners to pass costs on to tenants if they are not making a fair return on their investment, these new hardship rules imply that owners who “need” to raise rents for seismic safety are already making a fair return, so where is the hardship??!
REVISED DATE!Tuesday, November 19 at 7 PM Seismic Retrofits to City Council Council Chambers: 2134 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
Ellis Act Update
