You may be one of the majority of Mountain View citizens who voted in November in favor of the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act (Measure V). You may be surprised to learn that the Rental Housing Committee (RHC) appointed by our City Council is not moving forward efficiently to implement this law.
Why not? Measure V required the City Council to appoint a five-person Rental Housing Committee with no more than two landlords or property managers, so that the interests of renters would receive fair representation. Our City Council, the majority of whom opposed Measure V, appointed one landlord, one property manager, two renters, and, as a fifth member, Tom Means, a former City Council member and an outspoken opponent of rent control during the campaign!
On an ongoing basis, Mountain View staff and legal consultants provide impartial in-depth research and recommendations to the Rental Housing Committee, based on the years of experience with rent control in other California cities. Ironically, the majority of the RHC has voted against staff recommendations on some important issues, citing their concern that the recommendations are not generous enough to landlords.
An example is the committee’s choice, as a basis for landlord petitions for higher rent increases, of the Bay Area Consumer Price Index (CPI) that is based on the rent of primary residences rather than the widely used CPI based on all items, as recommended by staff. Because of increasing Bay Area rents, this key decision creates an incentive for large numbers of landlords to file petitions for rent increase exceptions. Also, each petition may result in administrative costs of over $1,000.
This undermines the intent of Measure V, which is to limit rent increases to stabilize our community, while secondarily providing an appeals process for those few landlords who believe they are unable to achieve a fair financial return due to rent control.
Important issues will be decided at the next several meetings of the Rental Housing Committee. One critical decision is who will handle the petition process for renters and landlords. We support choosing Project Sentinel, the highly regarded regional nonprofit with years of experience in housing arbitration. This choice would provide a stable and objective intermediary to calm a contentious process. Another vital decision is whether to allow landlords to pass on any of the cost of rent stabilization to renters.
Most small landlords seem to want to do what is right under the law. But the majority of the RHC seems intent on maximizing landlords’ profits by reinterpreting Measure V and reinventing the process. The time and costs this will incur may cause City Council members to wish they had respected the will of Mountain View voters and appointed a more objective and balanced Rental Housing Committee.
The next meeting of the RHC will be on Monday, Aug. 28, at 7 p.m. in the City Council chambers. All of those interested in testifying or hearing the issues discussed are encouraged to attend.
Marilyn Winkleby, Michael Fischetti, Susyn Almond, Meghan Fraley, Dorothy Schafer, Ron Schafer, and Randy Jones contributed to this column. They are members of Progressive Action — Mountain View, a group of local citizens who support efforts to improve economic justice and diversity in the community.
