Oakland, California, Just-Cause Eviction Requirements and Rent Increase Approval, Measure JJ (November 2016)
| Measure JJ: Oakland Just-Cause Eviction Requirements and Rent Increase Approval |
|---|
|
| The basics |
| Election date: |
| November 8, 2016 |
| Status: |
 Approved
|
| Topic: |
| Local rent control |
| Related articles |
| Local rent control on the ballot November 8, 2016 ballot measures in California Alameda County, California ballot measures |
| See also |
| Oakland, California |
A rent control measure was on the ballot for Oakland voters in Alameda County, California, on November 8, 2016. It was approved.
| A yes vote was a vote in favor of extending just-cause eviction requirements from units approved for occupancy before October 14, 1980, to units approved before December 31, 1995, and require landlords to request approval for non-standard rent increases. |
| A no vote was a vote against extending just-cause eviction requirements from units approved for occupancy before October 14, 1980, to units approved before December 31, 1995, and require landlords to request approval for non-standard rent increases. |
Election results
| Measure JJ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 124,282 | 75.24% | ||
| No | 40,895 | 24.76% | ||
- Election results from Alameda County Registrar of Voters
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[1]
| “ | Shall Oakland’s Just Cause For Eviction and Rent Adjustment Ordinances be amended by: (1) extending just-cause eviction requirements from residential rental units offered for rent on or before October 14, 1980 to those approved for occupancy before December 31, 1995; and (2) requiring landlords to request approval from the City before increasing rents by more than the cost-of-living adjustment allowed by City law? | ” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the Oakland City Attorney:
| “ |
The Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance (“Just Cause Ordinance”) (O.M.C. § 8.22.300, et seq.) generally prohibits landlords from evicting tenants without just cause from residential rental units covered by the ordinance. The voters adopted and therefore must approve any amendments to this Ordinance. The Rent Adjustment Ordinance (O.M.C. § 8.22.100, et seq.) allows tenants to ask the City’s Rent Adjustment Program (“Rent Program”) to reverse rent increases that exceed the cost-of-living adjustment (“COLA”) allowed under City law. This measure would extend just-cause requirements to more units and require landlords to obtain advance approval from the Rent Program before raising rents more than the COLA. Exemption for New Construction The Just Cause f Ordinance prohibits evictions without just cause for residential rental units in Oakland that were completed and first offered for rent on or before October 14, 1980. Just cause protections do not apply to units completed and first offered for rent after October 14, 1980, unless the new units were created by rehabilitating, improving, or converting pre-existing space. The measure would extend the just cause requirements to new units constructed and approved for occupancy before December 31, 1995. As a result, just cause would be required to evict tenants from rental units approved for occupancy between October 23, 1980 and December 30, 1995, unless the units are exempt from just cause for other reasons. If the City did not issue a certificate of occupancy for a rental unit, then whether the unit was subject to just cause requirements would depend on the date the last construction permit was finalized before occupancy. Petitions for Rent Increases The Rent Ordinance currently allows landlords to make COLA adjustments in rent based on changes to the Consumer Price Index. A landlord is not required to obtain advance approval from the City before imposing a rent increase exceeding the allowable adjustment. If a rent increase exceeds the allowable adjustment, the tenant may object by filing a petition with the Rent Program. The measure would amend the Rent Ordinance to require that landlords obtain approval from the Rent Program before imposing any rent increases exceeding the COLA. Without advance approval, landlords could not make tenants pay any rent increases noticed on or after February 1, 2017 exceeding the COLA. Notice to Landlords and Tenants The measure would amend the Rent Ordinance to require the City to provide an annual notice to residents and owners of all covered units. The notice would include the amount of the allowable COLA increase and explain how to get information to petition for a rent increase exceeding the COLA, or how to challenge such a petition. Administration The measure would amend the Rent Ordinance to require the City Administrator to report annually to the City Council on topics such as Rent Board vacancies, statistics on petitions and evictions, and other information. The measure would also require the City Administrator to develop a searchable, public database with information about hearing decisions, appeals, and notices filed.[2] |
” |
| —Oakland City Attorney[3] | ||
Full text
The full text of the measure is available here.
Support
Supporters
The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of the measure:[3]
- Rebecca Kaplan, Oakland City Council Member At Large
- Josie Camacho, Alameda County Central Labor Council (AFL-CIO)
- Robin Torello, Alameda County Democratic Party Central *Committee
- Noel Gallo, Oakland City Council Member
- Desley Brooks, Oakland City Council Member
Arguments in favor
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[3]
| “ |
Protect Oakland Renters, Vote Yes on Measure JJ. In March, Mrs. Paula Beale, a 63-year-old grandmother with health issues, living on a fixed income, received notice that her rent would be raised 27%. She had to leave her home. Mrs. Paula is part of the shocking statistics that illustrate Oakland’s housing crisis. More than 1,000 people are forced from their homes every month, and Oakland rents have risen to the 3rd highest in the nation. Housing displacement and rent increases in Oakland are forcing out longterm residents, like seniors and teachers, who are priced out of the marketplace and the area as a whole. Measure JJ is part of the solution. Placed on the ballot by unanimous vote of the City Council, Measure JJ is a straight forward revision of Oakland’s current rent control ordinance based on what works to protect renters. Measure JJ will:
This measure protects renters while being fair to landlords. A broad community coalition, including many small landlords are supporting Measure JJ because they want to protect the character of our City. Oakland continues to grow and change, but we must protect low-income residents, families and artists and help them remain here. Please join us in our campaign at: www.protectoaklandrenters.org[2] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official argument against the measure:[3]
- Jill Broadhurst, Executive Director, East Bay Rental Housing Association
Arguments against
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[3]
| “ |
Property owners AND renters will be negatively affected by this ordinance because it will make it significantly more difficult to remove drug dealers and nuisance individuals from our neighborhoods. Do you want to have to go to court to testify against a drug dealing, problem neighbor? This will preserve their right to stay, affecting your life situation everyday. This adds thousands of units to “Just Cause” protections, protections that keep problem residents in your neighborhood. The only remedy: to spend thousands on a lawyer, or get the city attorney’s office involved. 70% of Oakland rentals are 2-6 unit buildings, owned by mom-and-pop owners, who have deep roots in the community and consist of ethnic minorities and immigrants. 85% of Oakland rentals are older housing that brings continued maintenance. No one wants to live next to a blighted eyesore, but this strict measure will cause cash-strapped small owner to just do the bare minimum. 85% of Oakland’s housing is covered by rent control, which means current rent increases are an annual 2.0%, last year it was 1.7%. Anything built after 1995 is not covered by this measure and will NOT add protections to those residents. Garbage and recycling for rental properties went up as much as 500% for all buildings! City council just voted to increase the rent adjustment program fee by more than double. Next year council will roll out new programs for small owners and add more fees! Oakland’s City auditor issued a report stating how flawed and mismanaged the Rent Adjustment Program is. Let’s fix the Rent Adjustment Program instead of punishing struggling Oakland residents and businesses. This measure will tear down older, quality housing and build new, cheap box-designed, decontrolled buildings. Oakland needs more housing, but let us preserves our diversity and the future of Oakland. Vote NO.[2] |
” |
Path to the ballot
This measure was put on the ballot through a vote of the governing officials of Oakland, California.
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Oakland Local rent control. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Alameda County, "November 8, 2016 General Election Local Measures," accessed October 12, 2016
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Alameda County, "Measure JJ," accessed October 30, 2016
 |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2024 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
