The Concord City Council will consider a draft ordinance tonight that would establish rent stabilization and just cause for eviction policies. The major features of the proposed laws are outlined below.
In addition, city staff has learned that misinformation about the ordinance is circulating within the community, and we want to clarify that single-family homes WILL NOT be subject to the proposed rent stabilization provisions.
In addition, the only aspect of the proposed regulations that would roll back (or be retroactive) to January of 2023 is the rent amount and allowable annual rent increase that multi-family rental properties built before 1995 may charge as the proposed new ordinance takes effect.
Read the Feb. 13 staff report.
View the chart indicating which types of units are covered under each provision of the ordinance.
Public comments can be emailed to CityClerk@cityofconcord.org before 3 p.m. on Feb. 13 to become part of the official record and to be shared with Councilmembers prior to the meeting. Because this meeting is a continuation of the Jan. 30 meeting, and Council has collectively heard more than 12 hours of public comment on this topic, the in-person public comment period has been closed.
RENT STABILIZATION
Rent stabilization would NOT apply to rented single-family homes, rented condominium units, or rented accessory dwelling units.
Rent stabilization WILL apply to multi-family rental complexes of 2 or more units built before Feb. 1, 1995.
Here is a brief description of major features to be included in the proposed new Ordinance:
- Limit annual rent increases to 3% or 60% of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), whichever is lower.
- Controls the allowable rent increases upon the first date of occupancy but does not control the dollar amount for starting-of-occupancy rent (i.e., it preserves vacancy decontrol).
- Includes a “rent rollback” provision that sets rents to the dollar amounts that were charged for rent as of January 12, 2023, plus allows for up to the Ordinance-allowed rent increase of 2.52% for the 2023 calendar year (2.52% is 60% of the CPI for April 2023).
- The Ordinance would establish a process utilizing a Hearing Officer whereby tenants could appeal their rent increases, if they believed them to be inconsistent with the City Ordinance, and whereby property owners could request higher rent increases, above what the Ordinance would otherwise allow, to obtain a fair return on their investment property.
JUST CAUSE FOR EVICTION
Just cause for eviction WOULD apply to most rented units in Concord, including rented single-family homes and rented condominium units.
Just cause would NOT apply to rented accessory dwelling units.
Here is a brief description of major features to be included in the proposed new Ordinance:
- Just cause regulations do not apply when a tenant is evicted for “at-fault” reasons, such as non-payment of rent, breach of a material term of the lease, or occupying the space in such a manner as to create a nuisance or criminal activity.
- Just cause protections for tenants would be triggered when a tenant is evicted for “no-fault on the tenant’s part” reasons, such as when an owner wants to move into the unit, wants to remove the entire complex from the rental market (Ellis Act eviction), or needs the unit vacant to perform substantial rehabilitations.
- A “right of return” would be available in some instances, such as when substantial rehabilitation is completed, or if an owner returns the unit to the rental market within a specified time after an Ellis Act eviction.
- In the case of no-fault evictions, just cause provisions in the revised draft Ordinance would require the property owner to pay three times the Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Fair Market Rent (FMR) and an extra $3,000 to cover moving expenses. If applied in 2024, the total payment required would range from $8,475 for a studio unit to $14,862 for a four-bedroom home, apartment, or condominium. Prices are set by HUD for each calendar year. Certain tenants, such as those over 62 years of age, or who are terminally ill or disabled, would be eligible for an additional month of FMR.
Everyone who owns property subject to either rent stabilization or just cause protections would be required to register their unit(s) with the City of Concord annually and pay a yet-to-be-determined annual registration and administration fee.
So in other words: RENT CONTROL. Aka anti free market.
What incentime will a Landlord have to modernize/upgrade Their property when they cannot charge what the market dictates???
And so more revenue for the city that they vote for? “Everyone who owns property subject to either rent stabilization or just cause protections would be required to register their unit(s) with the City of Concord annually and pay a yet-to-be-determined annual registration and administration fee.”
Unrepresented taxes disguised as fees. Nice, which ones of your ClayCord brain trusts elected these jackXXs??
Which giant developer who built apartment complexes after 1995, greased the council’s palms? For probably the second time, first time being when they slide through the permits to build…
I think the council should consider this very carefully. Rent control can result in a loss for both landlords and tenants. When insurance, maintenance, and taxes all increase above the amount allowed for an increase in rent, then good landlords will get out of the business. This will leave only the bad landlords, who don’t make necessary repairs to keep a home safe and comfortable. Rent control may benefit the tenants of today, but will hurt the tenants of tomorrow.
Many issues with rent control but damage to future tenants isn’t one of them. Landlords can place the unit at market value when a the existing tenant moves out.
Watch how quickly rents go up on single family homes. That affects future tenants for sure!
Single family home supply will drop as owners take their properties off the market due to these onerous “just cause” regulations. That will drive up prices.
If an owner cannot get what they think is a reasonable return, they will sell it to someone who will, no matter what or how they achieve that return. Be careful what you wish for, because of the law of unintended consequences.
Concord – 🖕
It’s all about control.
And they want the landord to pay a registration and adminstrative fee … so a money grab from the landlord while you are telling the landlord that they cannot raise the rates and they have to roll back rent to Jan 12, 2023, over a year ago. Are landlords expected to give a refund to the tenants for ‘overcharging them for a year?’
Thank God my rentals units are NOT in Concord!
Ok, let’s take it a step further…Why not rent control on office space, the landlords are infringing on entrepreneur class/capitalism. Let’s just give all property to the government.
Everyone keep griping about this. But remember every election you keep voting for these idiots. Do you really expect any thing else from them. Time to clean house and get some real people in there that will do what’s right
And neither do the gripers nor the politicians have any useful solutions. Both sides want more money for themselves. Neither are about serving the public. We’re going towards owning property is a privilege not a right due to griping. (BTW, I am a property owner).
Captain
I read this comment yesterday and it made me think a lot. The question is, is owning property a right or is it a privledge? Your statements appear to say that owning property should be a right. I disagree with you.
As with a car, nice tv, nice clothes etc, those are earned rights through hard work or for the rare few, passed down from previous generations. Property falls into that realm for me. During my younger years, evictions were the norm for my parents/siblings but today my family owns our home almost free/clear plus multiple rentals. This took saving pennies, working multiple jobs, not splurging, driving 15 year old vehicles with 150K miles etc, but we did it. I believe that the more we give people free stuff, because they are considered ‘rights’, the more people want to have. I think we should earn our way in this world.
I am curious as to your view point, and if whether or not I have misunderstood your words in your response.
Can we extend this to PG&E, increase of 3% or 60% of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), whichever is lower. How about the same for all the landlord/homeowner expenses including all utilities, water and garbage pickup. Does the Concord City Council have the data on those increases over the last 10 year. Why just protect renters, how about protecting owners too? Regarding eviction, just follow the state rules, Concord doesn’t need anything special.
PG&E is too big. It should have been broken up into regional utilities years ago so as to focus on each different regions issues. But PG&E has been around since the 1850s and run by crusty old money junkies. It’s about profit and not service.
Maybe we can take it a step further and get other options besides the PG&E Monopoly.
Sacramento did it. Alameda did it.
Fresno is attempting to do it.
Having read the proposed regulations, I would never rent my home out or invest in rental property in Concord. Even single family homes and condos owned by individuals are being pulled into the rent registry, “just cause” vortex of fees, fines, and serious legal liability.
The whole thing looks like a Frankenstein: cut and pasted from San Francisco, Berkley, and Oakland rent control laws. Don’t assume you can simply sell your house and get out of the landlord business. A savvy tenant or their layer can keep you in court for a long time over “just cause”.
Now that State Farm and others have stopped selling new policies in California it has become very expensive to get home owner’s insurance. One factor is more law suits. These new rent control laws would also provide more opportunities for lawyers to sue the public.
.
From Goodlifemgment.com: “California is seeing a rise in third-party litigation financing, where outside parties fund lawsuits in exchange for a portion of the settlement.” From https://www.goodlifemgmt.com/blog/california-home-insurance-crisis/
.
The lawyers would benefit. The public would only get more regulatory hardship.
“Rent Stabilization” is a BS term for rent control. ALL of the costs associated with my rental have gone up – not to mention the property taxes with all of the bonds and other crap that property owners have to pay that renters don’t! A 3% rent increase while my costs have gone up nearly 20%? Register my property with Concord? Hell no. Oh and if I sell my property do you think it will stay a rental? NOPE! This will make renting even harder. Stay out of my business Concord or I’ll sell and buy a rental property elsewhere.
This has got to be a violation of our civil rights to be secure in our personal property and affects for starters.
No undue taxation (fees) without representation….
I’m seriously willing to form together to file a class action lawsuit against the city if they approve or pass this nonsense.
This ordinance is one hundred percent aimed at single-family residences. The opening lens article is 100% misleading. This ordinance has more than one layer. Layer one is the control over the amount of rent increase at time of negotiations that is not included in the rent stabilization. The second layer, however, says that once the lease is up and you ask a family to leave your home for whatever reason it can cost upwards of $15,000 to recover your property and this is 100% aimed at single-family residence.
The ordinance passed! 😀