The city is moving ahead with its relocation assistance ordinance.
The ordinance was being crafted to make landlords pay tenants to aid in relocation if an eviction was also made for reasons out of the tenants’ control.
The state recently passed AB 1482, however, which provided some form of rent control and would overlap and possibly conflict with the proposed ordinance. AB 1482 provides one month of rent to any tenant who is evicted for a no-fault just cause. It also caps rent increases to 5% plus inflation.
The law would only apply to multi-family units that had been built more than 15 years ago, though that would apply to all complexes in the city limits, as no new apartment complexes have been built since 2000, when the growth management ordinance took effect.
Healdsburg City Council met Sept. 16 at city hall to address necessary changes. It decided to move ahead with an ordinance that would increase the payout from landlords to qualified tenants under 120% of average median income.
The new version of the ordinance will add another month’s rent for those whose income qualifies if the eviction is due to a conversion or sale of the unit.
The proposed changes drew passionate responses from both sides of the argument during public comment.
Landlords — and real estate agents who represented them — went up and pushed for not doing anything beyond what the state now calls for. The reasoning was that it would make Healdsburg a less attractive place to develop and that any assistance provided would not work to solve the ultimate goal of creating more housing.
The perception of the greedy landlord, one said, was untrue, and the high-dollar sales of multi-family units like apartment complexes do not have as high a profit margin as some might think. The added cost of doing business with the relocation assistance would actually force some landlords to raise rents, they said, even some who had been holding off on increases.
One renter also spoke out in favor of not adding to the state’s rent control. She said she did not want to see her rent increase, which she saw as imminent. She also noted that she knew hard-working landlords who didn’t deserve to shoulder the burden caused by the housing crisis.
Other tenants spoke out in favor of providing more assistance. Several spoke out on the need to keep housing for the working class in Healdsburg and hoped that putting more assistance together would prevent gentrification of their units.
Some tenants were worried about voicing their concerns in front of their landlords, whom they said were also present at the meeting, for fear of retribution. Several of the renters who wanted changes were from the Latino community, and they had expressed concern over being able to report problems, such as with plumbing, without facing eviction. There was also one claim that when work was done, it came with racist comments.
There were also success stories from tenants who had gotten relocation assistance through Reach for Home, which they said kept them from being on the street as they found a new place. Having a security deposit and first and last month’s rent was not something they felt was possible for a working class family, especially when given 30 days notice.
When the item came back to council, Mayor David Hagele denounced racism in the tenant/landlord dynamic, saying, “That’s not acceptable here in Healdsburg.”
Council was receptive to both sides’ concerns, though there was no real consideration to wait and see how AB 1482 would impact the city.
“I think there’s a way to navigate this so that everyone wins,” Hagele said.
There was a split when deciding how to direct staff on the ordinance’s changes. Hagele and Councilmember Evelyn Mitchell favored raising the threshold for payouts on the second month’s rent to 80% AMI, while Vice Mayor Leah Gold and Councilmember Shaun McCaffery were in favor of the previous direction to staff to go with 120% AMI. There was also debate on whether to add two months to AB 1482, for a total of three, and whether to tie the additional month pay out to a sale.
This left Councilmember Joe Naujokas to weigh in. He had quipped “This is why we make the big bucks” when the topic came back to council, and now had to live up to the phrase.
“No pressure,” Naujokas said. “My engineer side just says to keep it simple,” though he saw both sides.
In the end, he thought that adding two more months on top of the one month required by AB 1482 would be too onerous. He also aligned with the sale trigger for the second month’s pay and with keeping the income requirement at 120% AMI.
Hagele also wanted to see more focus on funding the navigation services for relocation, possibly using Measure S funds. He said the navigation component was important in getting people connected with the right unit for their income.
The rest of council was more reluctant to continue the talk, and it was pointed out that there would be further discussion of implementing the ordinance once it was crafted.
City Manager David Mickaelian said that there will be three steps left for the ordinance. A presentation with directed changes from staff, then the council will hold a first and second reading of the ordinance.
