A proposal to consider an emergency ordinance aimed at preventing San Mateo renters from being evicted from their homes for no reason stalled after the City Council opted to first engage stakeholders in its quest to address the region’s affordable housing crisis.
Hundreds of people from all sides of the spectrum — including property owners, real estate agents, teachers, families and low-income renters — gathered Tuesday night as Councilman David Lim sought to persuade officials to place a temporary 90-day just cause eviction ordinance for a vote Sept. 21.
Instead, the item was pulled as three members of the council preferred to stay the course while expressing concerns isolating property owners wouldn’t be conducive to their commitment to gather facts before considering solutions — which ultimately, could include a just cause eviction ordinance. Lim and Councilman Rick Bonilla supported placing the renter protection ordinance up for consideration at the next meeting, but didn’t receive enough support.
“I think we need to have a process that isn’t just a piecemeal one. I want us to really look at this. I’d like more data, more fact finding and then come to a solution that is from a process of engagement,” said Mayor Maureen Freschet, who proposed last month the city host public hearings to consider tenant protection measures as well as development of additional housing.
Lim said he was moved by the wave of residents who have made recent pleas to the council as they’re suddenly facing evictions — actions many suggested were due to developer speculation or those who purchase properties then drastically increase rents for alleged improvements.
“A 90-day ordinance that sunsets in 90 days, I don’t see harming the good landlords that are here today saying they don’t do evictions unless it’s a last resort. I balance the other end where time is not just money,” Lim said in response to property owners who said it’s already extremely costly and difficult to evict tenants. “Time is where these people are living, time is people living under a bridge, time is people being taken out of school.”
Dozens of property owners, real estate agents and representatives from trade associations spoke in opposition noting there are already existing laws governing tenant-landlord contracts. Many noted it can be very difficult to evict a bad tenant — one told an anecdote of it costing nearly $8,000 in legal fees — and requested the city focus on constructing new housing units. Others also feared there would be unintended consequences of such an ordinance, including harming good tenants.
“Just cause eviction ordinance will be a gateway to rent control,” said Eric Castongia, a real estate agent working in San Francisco and San Mateo counties. “I believe there should be a way to help people who can’t afford rents, but it should not be on the back of property owners.”
Others argued landlords who weren’t evicting tenants for no reason shouldn’t be worried about such an ordinance.
“We’re talking about good landlords who will not be punished, but there are bad landlords that should be controlled just as bad tenants should be controlled,” said Jennifer Martinez, executive director of Peninsula Interfaith Action. “We don’t have the same protection as renters that we should have because the market is screaming. And many, not the good landlords, but the bad landlords want to take advantage of that and hurt our families.”
Daniel Saver, an attorney with Community Legal Aid Services, said his organization has been contacted by 57 families that received no-cause evictions from their San Mateo homes in the last seven months alone. But the nonprofit estimates the number of those evicted was much higher and it’s likely hundreds of people have been unjustly forced to leave their homes.
The council, while divided on Lim’s recommendation, unanimously agreed that tending to the issue would require a more comprehensive solution.
Although councilmembers expressed frustration with not being able to engage the so-called “problem landlords,” numerous real estate professionals and property owners attended the meeting willing to work on the issue.
“While we understand the urgent desire to look into solutions and we are in agreement that we should, [Lim’s] proposal is not the right way. We should be educating renters on their existing protections and … not alienate those who you want to be part of the solutions,” said Rhovy Antonio, government affairs director with the California Apartment Association.
The ordinance would have continued to allow property owners to evict tenants for a variety of reasons such as illegal activity, breaking terms of the lease, failing to pay rent or if the owner wanted to move in. It would have also allowed for property owners to require tenants to move out while they conduct repairs to the units so long as the tenants are given the option to move back in with provisions for rent increases to cover the costs of improvements.
Dozens of property owners, real estate agents and representatives from trade associations spoke in opposition noting there are already existing laws governing tenant-landlord contracts. Many noted it can be very difficult to evict a bad tenant — one told an anecdote of it costing nearly $8,000 in legal fees — and requested the city focus on constructing new housing units. Others also feared there would be unintended consequences of such an ordinance, including harming good tenants.
“Just cause eviction ordinance will be a gateway to rent control,” said Eric Castongia, a real estate agent working in San Francisco and San Mateo counties. “I believe there should be a way to help people who can’t afford rents, but it should not be on the back of property owners.”
Others argued landlords who weren’t evicting tenants for no reason shouldn’t be worried about such an ordinance.
“We’re talking about good landlords who will not be punished, but there are bad landlords that should be controlled just as bad tenants should be controlled,” said Jennifer Martinez, executive director of Peninsula Interfaith Action. “We don’t have the same protection as renters that we should have because the market is screaming. And many, not the good landlords, but the bad landlords want to take advantage of that and hurt our families.”
Daniel Saver, an attorney with Community Legal Aid Services, said his organization has been contacted by 57 families that received no-cause evictions from their San Mateo homes in the last seven months alone. But the nonprofit estimates the number of those evicted was much higher and it’s likely hundreds of people have been unjustly forced to leave their homes.
The council, while divided on Lim’s recommendation, unanimously agreed that tending to the issue would require a more comprehensive solution.
Although councilmembers expressed frustration with not being able to engage the so-called “problem landlords,” numerous real estate professionals and property owners attended the meeting willing to work on the issue.
“While we understand the urgent desire to look into solutions and we are in agreement that we should, [Lim’s] proposal is not the right way. We should be educating renters on their existing protections and … not alienate those who you want to be part of the solutions,” said Rhovy Antonio, government affairs director with the California Apartment Association.
Affordable housing advocates remained concerned as solutions will likely take a substantial amount of time, particularly as cities’ funding mechanisms remain scant since the dissolution of redevelopment agencies in 2012. Josh Hugg, program manager with the Housing Leadership Council, said the city officials should carefully consider doing all it can to support residents.
“This decision really reflects the fundamentals of what we are as a community. It finally begs the question, are we willing to stand up for the half of the city (those who rent), that does not live under the protection of a 30-year fixed mortgage or Prop. 13 taxes, the people that are living on the roller coaster that is Silicon Valley where we create 40,000 jobs and just 3,000 homes?” Hugg said. “We absolutely need to build our way to affordability, but the size of the task and the forces you will be facing in that will take a long time and much more political will. So please, consider every option.”
The San Mateo City Council will discuss a process to address housing options at its Monday, Sept. 21 meeting.
FAIR USE NOTICE. Tenants Together is not the author of this article and the posting of this document does not imply any endorsement of the content by Tenants Together. This document may contain copyrighted material the use of which may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Tenants Together is making this article available on our website in an effort to advance the understanding of tenant rights issues in California. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.