Tag: tenants

By Posted on Posted in Actions

Pages-from-2013-12-03-Item-29-City-Council-RedistrictingWITH-MAPSCalling all tenants! Save fair elections and stop gerrymandering in Berkeley!

Come out on Saturday at 10:30 AM for the kickoff of the redistricting referendum. Folks who care about giving all voters a voice in Berkeley should come pick up petitions tomorrow – we have 30 days to gather 5,275 signatures!

The Council majority have approved a redistricting plan under the guise of creating a student district – but the district would only include students on the south side of campus, and cut the student co-ops from District 7, placing these progressive voters in the homeowner-dominated District 6. It seems that the vote may have been timed such that signatures must be collected while students, and practically everyone else in Berkeley, are traveling or in bed with the flu.

Tenants must show strong tenant support for the Berkeley Referendum Coalition, which includes the only two tenant Council members – the only Council folks who work closely with BTU to represent your concerns!

Worthington’s re-election may be at stake.

WHEN: Saturday, December 21, 2013, 10:30 AM
WHAT: Kick-Off and Press Conference: Berkeley Redistricting Referendum
WHO: Council members Jesse Arreguin and Kriss Worthington; neighborhood leaders, progressive activists and students
WHERE: Outside Mudrakers Cafe, 2801 Telegraph Avenue, Berkeley 

Berkeley Referendum Coalition press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 19, 2013

CONTACTS:
Jesse Arreguin: 510-717-2910
Alejandro Soto-Vigil : 510-610-0466
Lisa Stephens: 510-575-2068
Kriss Worthington: 510-548-879
Matthew Lewis: 310-869-8250 

A diverse coalition of Berkeley residents including neighborhood leaders, progressives and students will kick off a month-long signature drive this Saturday to stop the City Council’s controversial redistricting ordinance from going forward.

On Tuesday, December 17th, a divided Berkeley City Council on a 6-3 vote adopted a redistricting plan that will shape the composition of the Council for the next ten years.

Just like we have seen in Texas and throughout the country in which redistricting has been used for partisan political purposes, Berkeley’s City Council has adopted a controversial plan that not only divides neighborhoods but also gerrymanders out students and progressive voters who live north of the UC Berkeley campus. The Council rejected an alternative plan that (the United Student District Amendment) united students and kept neighborhoods together.

The Council could have chosen the plan that was more fair and inclusive, but instead adopted a partisan plan explicitly designed to minimize progressive voices on the Council. The Council also ignored other redistricting plans that were more balanced including the plan submitted by the Berkeley Neighborhoods Council.

Redistricting has been before the Council for the last three years. In early 2012 the Council voted to delay redistricting for one year, which disenfranchised over 4,000 people, keeping them from voting for the City Councilmember who would ultimately represent them. In November 2012 Berkeley voters approved changes to the Charter around redistricting which gave Council total flexibility to draw new boundaries. Prior to Measure R, the Council could only make minor adjustments to pre-existing boundaries that were adopted by voters in 1986. Unfortunately the Council has abused this new power, creating an unfair map.

Proponents of the redistricting referendum have 30 days to gather 5,275 signatures to stop the ordinance from going into effect. If we are successful the Council will have to reconsider the ordinance or put it on the ballot. The Berkeley Referendum Coalition is working over this holiday season to gather signatures so that the City Council can reconsider its decision and do the right thing – come up with a fair and inclusive plan that unites neighborhoods, students and the entire community.

Fun fact: In 1812, the word “gerrymandering” was created in response to Massachusetts governor Elbridge Gerry’s redrawing of state senate districts to favor the Democratic-Republican Party.

Berkeleyside: Berkeley Redistricting Map Splits Council, Community
“Some officials and community members testified that the council should reconsider its previous vote and, instead, approve Elgstrand’s USDA map. Supporters of this map said it does a better job protecting the progressive voice and keeping neighborhood groups like Halcyon and Le Conte together. Some questioned the legitimacy of the public process surrounding the BSDC map.”
http://www.berkeleyside.com/2013/12/18/berkeley-redistricting-map-splits-council-community/

KTVU:
“Worthington, who represents District 7, said Wednesday that he, Arreguin and Anderson favored an alternative plan called the United Student District Amendment (USDA) that proposed that college-age students comprise 90 percent of the district.”
http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local-govt-politics/berkeley-redistricting-plan-approved/ncB9y/

Daily Planet:
“The BSD plan district covers mainly the south side of campus, dominated by residential fraternities and sororities, and excludes the more progressive co-op residences located north of campus.”
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2013-11-22/article/41664?headline=Berkeley-City-Council-Adopts-Greek-Dominated-Redistricting-Proposal–

Daily Californian:
“The United Student District Amendment, proposed this summer as an improvement to the BSDC plan, includes Northside student cooperatives, as well as the dorms on the northeast side of campus and International House. Both sides want a student district — some hope that new boundaries could put a student on the City Council — but proponents of the USDA plan have called the BSDC map unnecessarily exclusive.”
http://www.dailycal.org/2013/12/18/city-council-passes-redistricting-plan-referendum-may-follow/

City Council December 17, 2013 Item 2, Redistricting:
Ayes: Capitelli, Maio, Moore, Wengraf, Wozniak and Bates.
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/Clerk/City_Council/2013/12Dec/Documents/2013-12-17_Item_02_Ordinance_7320.aspx

City Council December 3 Alternate Proposal Page 30:
2013-12-03 Item 29 City Council RedistrictingWITH MAPS

By Posted on Posted in Issues

CIty Council Finally Making Seismic Retrofits the Law
http://www.dailycal.org/2013/11/20/city-property-owners-may-required-retrofit-seismically-unsafe-buildings/

Berkeley Backs Off Supporting Richmond, CA on Foreclosure Efforts
Item 32 for December 2nd was amended to remove references to joining
Richmond’s Joint Powers Authority, making the Council’s deliberations meaningless:
www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/Clerk/City_Council/2013/12Dec/Documents/2013-12-03_Item_32_Supporting_City_of_Richmond_-_Rev.aspx

LWV Directors Live in Berkeley’s Wealthiest Areas
LWV Directors Live in Berkeley’s Wealthiest Areas

Berkeley’s League of Women Voters tells Rent Board to Cut Staff, Services:
http://www.lwvbae.org/league-news/league-urges-rent-board-improvements/

San Francisco Holds Hearings on Evictions:
“Overall evictions in San Francisco rose from 1,242 to 1,716 over the past three years, he said, reflecting an increase of 38.2 percent. Ellis Act evictions rose by 169.8 percent in that same time frame.”
http://www.sfbg.com/2013/11/19/eviction-epidemic-spurs-legislative-solutions
http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2013/11/14/hundreds-attend-hearing-call-action-evictions

Even San Francisco’s Mayor Wants to Stop Ellis Act Evictions:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-politicians-Restrict-Ellis-Act-evictions-4981974.php

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

Banks “Securitize” Rents, Cause Concern:

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/21/5932043/wall-street-firm-sells-bonds-backed.html

http://www.salon.com/2013/11/06/wall_street_slumlords_outrageous_new_scheme_how_they_could_wreck_economy_again/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/11/08/wall-street-figured-out-how-to-securitize-your-rent-should-you-worry/

By Posted on Posted in Actions, Issues

Berkeley City Council may finalize the law making it illegal to smoke in any multi-unit building in Berkeley on Tuesday December 3. Councilman Arreguin is making one more attempt to ensure the new law treats owners and renters equally. His suggestions also include more information to guide new renters, such as a registry of rental units and their smoking history, requiring owners to post signs, and that smokers receive warnings before they are fined.

Arreguin’s proposal – Council Item 28 – includes the radical suggestion that Berkeley actually allocate city staff to enforce the law!

You can see both smoking items on the Council agenda here (#28 and #30)
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/Clerk/City_Council/2013/12Dec/City_Council__12-03-2013_-__Regular_Meeting_Agenda.aspx

Here is a summary of Arreguin’s item:

28.  Referral to City Manager: Amendments to Tobacco-Free Multi-Unit Housing Ordinance (Continued from November 19, 2013)
From: Councilmember Arreguin
Recommendation: Refer to the City Manager for incorporation in a draft Tobacco-Free Multi-Unit Housing Ordinance the following proposals: 1. Delay the effective date of the ordinance to May 1, 2014, rather than March 1, 2014 as previously directed by the City Council, so that staff has adequate time to draft amendments based on this referral and bring back a final ordinance for Council adoption. Also delay the requirement that landlords notify tenants effective January 1, 2014. A delayed implementation date would also provide enough time for the city to conduct outreach to owners and tenants of the new requirements and increase smoking cessation resources before the ordinance goes into effect. 2. All initial leases or rental agreements signed on or after May 1, 2014 shall include language expressly prohibiting smoking in the units or in any common areas of a multi-unit residence. 3. That all initial leases or rental agreements signed after May 1, 2014, also notify tenants which units in the building do not have leases which expressly prohibit smoking. 4. Failure to provide either of the lease provisions noted above will allow the new tenant to break the lease without penalty.  (the language proposed by the Manager on October 1st along with the modifications proposed by the Rent Board on October 1st suffices). 5. That the City or Rent Board actively encourage and try to get tenants to sign voluntary lease addendums which prohibit smoking. Any voluntary lease addendum should be on a City/Rent Board developed form. 6. That the Rent Board establish and maintain a registry of all rental units in multi-unit housing indicating which units have leases that expressly prohibit smoking & require owners to notify the Rent Stabilization Board of lease provisions prohibiting smoking, and that the city require that owners of units registered with the Rent Board and those that aren’t registered provide information on which units have no-smoking lease clauses. 7. That owners be required to post signs in common areas of all multi-unit housing indicating smoking is prohibited. 8. That the City allocate staff to enforce violations of this ordinance through an initial investigation, written warning and followed by progressively increasing fines of $250, $500, $1000 and $1,500 for each infraction. Consistent with the previous staff drafted ordinance, there should be a cap on the number of private right of actions that any individual resident may file in a year against another smoking resident. 9. Includes the private right of action but strengthen it by allowing each resident to collect no more than $1,000 in a calendar year through private right of action. Doing this allows us to show that we are not tolerating or condoning smoking but believe that real financial penalties (rather than an unequal risk of lost housing) should be an appropriate penalty that can be applied in a more uniform way. Also making a violation the ordinance an infraction does not give an owner automatic grounds to evict a tenant. Also include the mandatory mediation provisions included in the ordinance proposed by the Manager on October 1, 10. Warnings be required by landlords and by the City before any enforcement action can be taken. The City Council should authorize sufficient staff and a funding source for proper enforcement and outreach. Previously, the City Manager indicated such a program would cost in the neighborhood of $120,000 annually to implement. Councilmember Maio indicated that the inspectors associated with the Rental Housing Safety Program be charged with implementing the Ordinance. If the RHSP fee were increased by $5 per unit, there would be sufficient resources to fund the necessary staff to implement the provisions of the Tobacco-Free Multi-Family Housing Ordinance I am proposing. If there needs to be a specific nexus between a no smoking ordinance and the RHSP program, City staff should explore amending the housing code so that smoking is a violation that can be cited and enforced by RHSP Housing code inspectors.

Berkeley Patch:
http://berkeley.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/call-for-tougher-antismoking-law-in-berkeley-multiunit-housing

SF Gate Blog:
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/saunders/article/Secondhand-smoke-gets-in-your-rights-4992161.php

San Francisco Chronicle:
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Berkeley-s-next-smoking-ban-may-hit-home-4984302.php

By Posted on Posted in Actions
This 18-unit OCCUPIED building on Durant has applied for a demolition permit.
This 18-unit OCCUPIED building on Durant has applied for a demolition permit.

Berkeley City Council is supposed to discuss three major policy changes concerning tenants THIS TUESDAY. There is a move to require owners of unsafe buildings to retrofit for earthquakes and another to allow tenants to be evicted for smoking cigarettes — but by far the most alarming issue is the Demolition Ordinance.

Last week, the Planning Commission was to consider changes to the law that have been in the works, and in the news, for months. But city staff said a California Supreme Court decision called Sterling Park, and a pending decision on a case involving the City of San Jose, mean that the city should do a “nexus study” before they change the existing law on demolition.

Since most of the changes weren’t very good for tenants, you might think that is good news — but it’s not! For one thing, a nexus study is about a fee, not about requiring one-for-one replacement of demolished rent controlled units with permanently affordable housing. For another, the City Attorney says the current law means any EMPTY rent controlled unit can be bulldozed with no mitigation whatsoever.

BTU needs you to stand with us during public comment on Tuesday at 7 PM!

We were told the demolition law would be on the Council agenda this week, but it isn’t, so we want folks to come during comment for off-agenda items, to restate the message in our petition – which now has over 270 signatures.

BTU member and Rent Board Commissioner Judy Shelton said it best at the Planning Commission:

“The various considerations of how to proceed with the Demolition Ordinance are confusing and difficult to parse, but for tenants this is a really simple issue: We want one-for-one replacement on demolitions of rent-controlled units, and we want these replacement units to be permanently affordable.

We don’t care what studies the City needs to conduct to make this happen. We don’t want a financial mitigation of $20,000, or even $34,000. We want the units.

We don’t care about the Sterling Park court decision. All we care about is that no affordable units be lost.

And if the City can’t do that, the City shouldn’t tear down rent-controlled housing.”

Demolition: Sterling Park Court decision – City Council Item 21
Seismic Safety: Item 24
Smoking in MultiFamily Housing: Item 27
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/Clerk/City_Council/2013/11Nov/City_Council__11-19-2013_-__Regular_Meeting_Agenda.aspx

By Posted on Posted in Issues

Because of the appeal of the Zoning Board ruling, tenants who lost almost everything in the 2012 fire at 2227 Dwight Way will be given relocation benefits and the units, once rebuilt, will remain under rent control. City Council voted to uphold the ZAB ruling, but “clarified” that previous tenants have the right to reoccupy the apartments at the previous rent-controlled rates. The units will remain under rent control, but if the old tenants don’t move back in, new rents can be set at market.

The appeal challenged the ZAB decision that the owners, the infamous Lakireddy family, would not have to pay the affordable housing mitigation fee. At issue was the possibility that the owners were at fault for the extend of the fire damage because smoke detectors and fire alarms may not have sounded, and the fire may have been caused by a faulty water heater.

Because of the appeal, the City Council also plans to clarify what constitutes “fault” when properties destroyed by fire are exempt from city fees like the affordable housing mitigation fee. In the appeal, it was suggested that city staff only looks for arson and does not consider negligence when determining fault.

Several BTU members wrote to the City Council in support of the appeal, and many tenant advocates spoke at the meeting.

According to Inside Bay Area, Council also voted to make rental housing inspection safety reports from the Dwight property public documents.

Inside Bay Area
http://www.insidebayarea.com/breaking-news/ci_24420395/berkeley-council-upholds-affordable-housing-exemption-rebuilt-apartments

Daily Californian
http://www.dailycal.org/2013/10/30/fire-damaged-building-retain-rent-controlled-status/

Berkeleyside
http://www.berkeleyside.com/2013/10/31/fire-damaged-berkeley-apartments-to-stay-rent-controlled/comment-page-1/

Daily Planet
http://berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2013-10-26/article/41579?headline=Berkeley-City-Council-to-Decide-on-Appeal-Brought-by-Former-Tenants-of-Fire-Ravaged-Building-with-History-of-Landlord-Negligence–By-Marcia-Poole

By Posted on Posted in Issues

Tenants from the building on Dwight partly destroyed by fire are asking for support on October 29. Renters and friends from 2227 Dwight, owned by Lakireddy Bali Reddy, the famous Berkeley landlord who plead guilty to federal charges about immigration fraud, transporting a minor for sex and tax evasion, are appealing the Zoning Board ruling that allows the owner to rebuild without paying mitigation fees. At issue is whether the owner was at fault for the extent of the fire because the smoke alarms may have been disconnected.

This is from BTU member Luis Amezcua:

The tenants of 2227 Dwight Way, on March 8, 2013, lost most, if not all, their personal possessions due to the fire that happened that night. The Zoning Adjustments Board (ZAB) approved a use permit to reconstruct the building, but there are some uncertainties that need to be addressed before the reconstruction can begin. For clarification, the appeal does not object to the reconstruction to the building, since it would remove a blight from the neighborhood and provide needed housing.

The ZAB was not fully informed of 2227 Dwight, and were unsure as to whether the fee and other mitigations applied. Even with the testimony of one tenant about the fire and the owner’s negligence, Staff determined that, because the fire was not arson, it was accidental. Staff failed to fully analyze the issue of fault, and restricted themselves between two possibilities (either arson or accidental) when making their determination; however, there is evidence that suggests that the landlord is fault due to negligence. The fire report states that “the building’s fire alarm system was not sounding when fire units arrived at the scene and was not heard sounding by firefighters at any point during the incident”, and that “the full circumstances surrounding the failure of the fire alarm system are still under investigation”. Tenants testify that the landlord disabled the fire alarm system due to false alarms, and it is a factor that needs to be considered when determining fault. Furthermore, there is still pending litigation between some of the former tenants and the property owner, with the question of who’s at fault being key. A few of the former tenants received settlement payments from the property owners – something that wouldn’t happen if this was an open and shut case where the property owner clearly was not at fault.

The ZAB’s decision on 2227 Dwight Way encourages owners of older housing to not adequately maintain their properties by creating unsafe housing which result in fire incidents. When a building is burned down, the owner can put the new units at market rate, lowering the amount of affordable housing in Berkeley, and allowing owners to avoid the Affordable Housing Mitigation Fee. All we ask is that the Council either require affordable housing to be built on site, an in-lieu payment be made to the Housing Trust Fund, or staff thoroughly investigate the issue of fault and remand this project back to the Zoning Adjustments Board with sufficient information so that they can make the proper findings (including the determination of fault).

City Council hears the appeal on October 29 and the tenants are asking for support at the meeting.

By Posted on Posted in Issues

Bulb_1025The City of Berkeley is working with the Ecology Center and other nonprofits to offer energy upgrades and sustainability tips to renters. They may even install a new shower head to cut down on water use!

Call 510-981-9818 or email “joanna at ebenergy.org” to schedule a one-on-one consultation.

By Posted on Posted in Issues

Couch_1017Date Change: Seismic Retrofits
The Berkeley City Council vote on mandatory Seismic Retrofits for “soft story” buildings is now scheduled for Tuesday, November 19.

Berkeley’s Demolition Law and Recent Zoning Changes
“…this new demolition ordinance draft which paves the way for developers to demolish all of the existing apartments in downtown Berkeley.”
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2013-10-04/article/41520?headline=New-Berkeley-Demolition-Ordinance-Proposal-Threatens-Rent-Controlled-Housing–By-Stephen-Stine

Brown Vetos Affordable Housing Bill
BTU will report back on how this veto may impact changes to the Demolition Ordinance
http://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/Brown-vetoes-bill-requiring-affordable-rental-4901709.php

Ellis Evictions Skyrocket: Protests in San Francisco
It won’t be long before the eviction wave comes across the Bay.
http://evictionfreesummer.wordpress.com/ 

San Francisco Housing Crisis in the New Yorker
SF Mayor says, “We’ve got to…make sure we protect many of the rent-controlled apartments that we have.” With his campaign to relax rules about demolition of rent controlled buildings, we are not sure the Berkeley Mayor would agree!
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/currency/2013/09/at-the-rent-board-new-tales-of-the-city.html?mobify=0

Berkeley’s Progressive Days
At Berkeley History Center on Center Street
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Everybody-got-together-in-Berkeley-commune-days-4889254.php

By Posted on Posted in Actions

100913Thursday, 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

The Rent Board recommendations were posted in a recent BTU update: Rent Board Seismic
The Housing Advisory Commission recommendations: HAC Memo SWOF with HAC amendments

more info:
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/Planning_and_Development/Building_and_Safety/Soft_Story_Program.aspx