Thanks to a couple dozen folks who wrote the Zoning Board, a sound position from the Rent Board, a good letter from the East Bay Community Law Center, and some very strong leadership by Zoning Commissioner Sophie Hahn, the 8 rent-controlled units on Walnut Street will be replaced with permanently affordable housing at the fancy new Acheson Commons development on University Avenue.
I hope the strong support for the message “empty units are still rent controlled units” from the public and the Zoning Commissioners will send a message to the City Council majority, who appear to be gutting the Demolition Ordinance for the benefit of developers and in complete disregard for the voter-approved Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance. Amendments being considered on July 2 could change Berkeley forever.
► This week’s fire at the Nash Hotel should remind us that the tenants from the buildings that burned on Telegraph Avenue and Dwight Way in late 2011 are still fighting to get their due. Replacements for both buildings are winding their way through Berkeley’s permit maze, but the City’s rules exempt these buildings from any affordable housing fees UNLESS the landlord was at fault for the damage. Since it was reported that the fire alarms were disconnected at the Lakireddy-owned building on Dwight, and tenants at the Haste-Telegraph Sequoia building have a lawsuit against the owner, fault is still being investigated. The 2227 Dwight property was at the Zoning Board on Thursday June 13, but there has been no press coverage. The Zoning Board granted the owner’s permit.
► The Berkeley Housing Authority took back 14 rental assistance vouchers they had already given to low-income families, and suspended the list of those who can get Section 8 assistance in the future, due to funding cuts from the federal government:
►As reported earlier, Berkeley Property Owners Association President Sid Lakireddy has filed a lawsuit against the four candidates for Rent Board chosen at the Tenant Convention in 2012. Another article on this lawsuit was published recently:
► Although the City Council considered revision to the Demolition Ordinance again on June 11, and the suggestions just keep getting worse for tenants and advocates of affordable housing, there were no news stories on the latest developments. BTU will post again when the Council calendars the next round of debate – it is expected for July 2nd. Several leaders are calling for Council to send the new draft back to the Planning Comission – since the proposal they approved wasn’t so much amended as replaced!! Video of the latest changes can be viewed on the City website – discussion started just after 9:45 PM on June 11.
► There has also been no news on the State of California investigation of fair election law violations by the faux-tenant slate, Tenants United for Fairness. When Berkeley’s Fair Campaign Practices Commission issued the landlord-backed candidates the second-largest election fine in Berkeley history last month, FCPC stated that there is an ongoing investigation at the state level.
As discussed at the potluck, Acheson Commons is before the Zoning Board Thursday. BTU is asking members to write, and members who wrote before to ask a friend to write!
In brief, we hope members will write something like this:
We, the members of the Berkeley Tenants Union, request that you rule in the public interest and require the 8 units on Walnut Street be replaced with affordable housing.
And send it to: TBlount@CityofBerkeley.info and
info@berkeleytenants.org (we will bring them to the ZAB meeting)
This just in – SB603, the great bill to protect security deposits that we’ve been telling you about, has failed in the state Senate. Tell your San Francisco pals that their Senator voted against protections for tenants. SF voters and friends of tenants everywhere should give Leland Yee a call and let him know we will remember his vote: 916-651-4008. http://legiscan.com/CA/bill/SB603/2013
An Everest Properties Building.
Also in the news, Berkeley Property Owners Association President Sid Lakireddy, whose family is one of Berkeley’s largest landlords, has filed a lawsuit against the four candidates for Rent Board chosen at the Tenant Convention in 2012. Lakireddy, who was a key leader in raising over $40,000 from landlords and property managers to try to defeat the Progressive Affordable Housing Slate, claims he isn’t a public figure. Igor Tregub is fundraising to defend the Slate’s first amendment rights. http://www.berkeleyside.com/2013/05/30/sid-lakireddy-sues-berkeley-rent-board-candidates-for-libel/
The lawsuit references the well known 1999 case against Sid Lakireddy’s uncle, who was convicted of transporting minors for illegal sexual activity and other offenses. In case you are new to Berkeley, you can learn about it on these sites: http://www.wassusa.com/ http://www.dianarussell.com/why_did_chanti_die.html
The Berkeley City Council is moving forward with changes to the demolition ordinance. The good news is that the Planning Department and the Rent Board have agreed on changes that almost make tenant activists happy. The bad news? Judging by comments made by Maio and Wengraf at the May 21 hearing on 2517 Regent Street, the pro-development Council majority plans to reject or water down the tenant protections the Rent Board and Planning negotiated.
BTU NEEDS YOU TO WRITE to the whole Council immediately!
We also hope you will come and speak on Tuesday June 4. Sometimes it seems it is harder for the Council to vote against the public when we are looking them in the eye.
Say you support the Berkeley Tenants Union position on Item 24, the Demo Ord.
State that no occupied units should be eliminated for any reason.
Emphasize that units emptied via the Ellis Act cannot be eliminated.
Ask that demolished units be replaced with permanently affordable housing.
Remind them that converting a duplex to a single family is still an elimination of a unit of affordable housing because of rent control. Ask that this type of demolition also be regulated and their impact on affordable housing stock mitigated.
If the Clerk gets letters or emails on Thursday the 30th, the correspondence will actually get delivered to Council before the meeting. If he gets them later than that, they get handed to our elected leaders at 7 PM, just before the meeting begins. If you write on Friday or Monday, please send them directly to each Council member as well as the address for the Clerk (see link below).
We’ve got some good news about SB603 – the great new law about Security Deposits that we keep telling you about. Thanks to unified support from tenants all over the state, the bill has moved out of committee and into the state Senate.
However, we really need to KEEP UP THE PRESSURE. The California Apartment Association has its members writing letters every day. They say, “With the change to the penalty provisions of the law, more tenants would surely challenge their deposit return. Any degree of victory would mean getting all of a security deposit back, plus penalties and actual damages.” Indeed!
1930 and 1922–24 Walnut Street (photo: Daniella Thompson, 2009)
In general, activists’ response led to deeper discussion of the issues but we need ALL members to respond to these action requests if we are to impact policy and decisions!
The Zoning Adjustments Board continued the appeal of Equity Residential’s mega-development. ZAB got about a dozen letters from BTU members objecting to a new interpretation of the Demolition Ordinance that would allow destruction of any empty rental unit without replacing it with affordable housing. This issue dominated the ZAB discussion but was continued to Thursday JUNE 13. BTU needs you to SHOW UP and STAND AGAINST UNMITIGATED DESTRUCTION OF RENT-CONTROLLED UNITS! This decision will certainly impact how the City Council decides on the new version of the Demo Ordinance. Don’t allow them to say empty units can be torn down – or you will be evicted soon!
In general, activists’ response led to deeper discussion of the issues but we need ALL members to respond to these action requests if we are to impact policy and decisions!
Four Berkeley Fair Campaign Committee members – appointed by TUFF Slate endorsers from the City Council – voted for a slap on the wrist. A dozen citizens made public comment asking for a real investigation and meaningful penalties. The commission also got four letters from BTU members, but voted 4-3 to approve the settlement agreement with low fines and no formal investigation of the faux tenant slate, and no investigation of the nearly $50,000 they accepted from landlords and property management firms. At least our public pressure led to them taking out the part of the agreement that said Rent Board Commissioner Judy Hunt and the other candidates didn’t do it on purpose! It would have been shameful to make such a declaration when there was no investigation or hearing.
There is still an ongoing investigation of the violations at the state level.
Berkeley’s City Council postponed a vote on a ban on all smoking in all multi-unit housing in the city until their May 28 meeting. BTU has not taken a position.
From Berkeley Patch:
Berkeley could become the first rent-control city in the nation to ban secondhand tobacco smoke in all multi-unit housing if the City Council adopts an anti-tobacco ordinance that was on the May 7 council agenda, according to city staff.
The city law would make it illegal to expose neighbors in multi-unit buildings to secondhand tobacco smoke and would require all new leases in such housing to include no-smoking clauses.
The proposed ordinance was developed by staff during the past year from study of smokefree housing laws in other California cities and consultation with Berkeley’s Community Health Commission and Rent Stabilization Board, according to a detailed, 28-page staff report prepared for the council meeting. The staff met also with the Medical Cannabis Commission and the Commission on Aging, according to the report.
Tonight the Fair Campaign Practices Commission meets (7 pm, North Berkeley Senior Center) to consider the stipulation offered by members of Tenants United for Fairness (TUFF)—a slate that ran for Berkeley’s Rent Stabilization Board in the November election—and the landlords who illegally funded their campaign.
The proposed stipulation would fine the TUFF slate members $300 each, and their backers under $3000 total.
In comparison, at the same meeting the people who raised money to defeat the street-sitting prohibiting Measure S and who failed to properly report $500 in late contributions in a timely manner are proposed to pay a penalty of that amount—$500, the amount they received. Nothing illegal about the contributions, they’re just paying the amount of the contribution for failing to report it on time.
TUFF raised and spent over $50,000 from landlords, over $30,000 from one PAC alone. Berkeley has a $250 per candidate donation limit and bars business donations, the vast bulk of those donations.
