Tenants struggling to pay their bills could see some relief with rent stabilization protections Antioch City Council approved on Tuesday.
The wards came on a split vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Mike Barbanica and Councilor Lori Ogorchock dissenting, after dozens of residents and advocates swarmed City Hall, many carrying signs and yellow or purple shirts representing some of the 15 nonprofit groups that supported capping annual rent increases for tenants. As at previous rallies and council meetings, many spoke of exorbitant rent increases — up to $500 a month or more — and landlords who failed to address cockroach infestations, broken appliances, the leaky plumbing and other issues.
Developer Ralph Hernandez spoke of a longtime neighbor whose rent went up $1,000 — $1,800 — an amount they couldn’t afford, leading to financial problems and the eventual marriage breakdown, he said.
“There are landlords taking advantage of tenants,” he said. “That is clear from some people I know and have spoken to. They need the city’s help. They need some kind of intervention.
Frustrated tenants, backed by advocacy groups like Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Action (ACCE), East County Regional Group and Monument Impact, first spoke in droves at the council in late January. In June, they gathered at two long-running apartment complexes where many had seen steep rises or faced multiple rent increases over short periods.
Then and this week, advocacy groups and tenants called for not only rent stabilization, but also for the city to create a rent commission to handle tenant appeals, for any protection to be retroactive to January and for an immediate rent freeze to avoid reprisals by landlords.
On Tuesday, the vast majority spoke about the problems of out-of-region business owners, many of whom managed apartments funded by the low-income tax credit program, which are not included in the protections for tenants of the ‘State.
Seven-year-old resident Juan Gonzlaez said he bounced from town to town before moving to Antioch with his family of three, but now struggles to pay rent and other expenses even s he worked the whole pandemic, he said.
“It’s scary every day to wake up and think I won’t have a place to live tomorrow,” he said, noting that his rent was more than 50% of his salary. “…Knowing that I can be evicted because I don’t have enough money to pay my rent.”
A woman said she had fallen behind on her rent, been evicted and had been living in her car with her family for two months.
“I’m still working; I’m fighting to get my kids to school,” she said. “And it’s very hard. It’s terrifying. people like us… I want my home back.”
However, not everyone was in favor of stabilizing rents.
Greg Lyons, a former landlord, said landlords needed flexibility to raise rents to pay for damages caused by tenants.
Property manager Joe Stokley also objected, noting that an overwhelming number of landlords “were good people”.
“I don’t believe it’s in the interest of the public or the people to enact new laws, new rules and bureaucracy for something that’s already in place to protect the people.”
Under the measure, only one rent increase will be allowed each year. But, to comply with state law, not all rental units would be subject to the proposed rent stabilization regulations. That’s because the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act prohibits local restrictions on units built after February 1, 1995, and single-family homes without accessory units, as well as condominiums and co-ops.
Would not be exempt under the proposed local measure would be owner-occupied duplexes and developments funded by the low-income tax credit scheme, including many of the city’s larger complexes such as Casa Blanca apartments. , Delta View and Delta Pines.
Barbanica, while sympathetic to tenants, said he was concerned about how rent stabilization could hurt family landlords, noting that the majority of problems came from business owners who were making much higher profits.
“I would like to work, look for a way to meet in the middle where we don’t harm moms and pops, but we don’t allow this (exorbitant rent increases) by business owners, and we close loopholes that allow them to do that,” he said.
Ogorchock warned that if the rent cap is too low, some landlords may sell their compounds, redevelop them or turn them into condominiums.
Tamisha Torres-Walker, however, said she supports the resolution as proposed and with a 3% or 60% CPI rent cap that many housing advocates as well as tenants have advocated for. She also noted that family landlords aren’t usually the ones who raise rents outrageously.
“And so I don’t think they will be affected very much, if at all, unless they decide to raise the rent by 30% overnight,” she said.
But Barbanica said that in addition to tenants, it’s homeowners who are experiencing inflation and cost increases that concern him.
The interim mayor suggested the city set a limit on rental rate increases in accordance with state law AB 1482 and close the loophole to increase rents above that law, which limited them to 5% more. the local CPI or 10%. His motion failed without a second.
Councilwoman Monica E. Wilson then proposed a rental cap of 3% or 60% CPI, whichever is lower, followed by approval of the rent stabilization order and waiver of her first reading. The motion passed 3-2 with Barbanica and Ogorchock opposed.
Mayor Lamar Thorpe noted that rent stabilization is the first part of the city’s overall tenant protections, but rules on justification and anti-tenant harassment policies will be considered in the future.
Check back for updates.