Laserfiche WebLink
6 <br /> <br /> was in effect at the time the tenant <br />vacated the unit for the substantial <br />remodel <br />• Potentially restricts a landlord’s <br />right to earn a fair return on their <br />investment <br /> <br />In addition to the rental rate options, staff also developed policy options related to the rental terms and <br />noticing requirements related to the right to return following a substantial remodel. A more detailed <br />overview of these options can be found in Attachment C. <br />Feedback from focus groups <br />To assist in refining the right to return options, City staff and members of the Ad Hoc invited <br />representatives from the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County (Legal Aid) and Community Legal <br />Services in East Palo Alto (CLSEPA) and representatives from the California Apartment Association (CAA) <br />and San Mateo County Association of Realtors (SAMCAR) and Faith in Action (FIA) to participate in focus <br />groups. While Legal Aid, CLSEPA, CAA, and SAMCAR all agreed to meet, members of FIA declined the <br />invitation to participate. <br />In July 2025, two focus groups were held, one with tenant legal organizations (Legal Aid and CLSEPA) <br />and one with landlord organizations (CAA and SAMCAR). Opinions were split on the rental rate options, <br />with tenant legal representatives supporting the TPA increase option (Option 2) and landlord/realtor <br />representatives supporting the option where the landlord sets the increase (Option 1), or conversely an <br />option where the right to return is not included as part of the Tenant Protection Ordinance <br />amendments. Both focus groups agreed that the new lease terms option made the most sense or was <br />necessary. For the noticing options, the legal aid representatives supported a 60-day minimum timeline <br />for tenants to re-occupy the unit after notifying the landlord of their intent to return, and <br />landlord/realtor representatives supported the shortest possible timelines for all noticing options. Both <br />focus groups recommended that tenants should have to demonstrate some sort of commitment to <br />returning to the unit, such as signing a lease, or paying a deposit. A more detailed summary of the <br />feedback received from these focus groups is included as Attachment D. <br />Alternative Mitigation Options <br />Feedback from the focus groups recommended providing an option to relocate to another unit should <br />tenants and landlords want to pursue that option instead. The Relocation Assistance Ordinance already <br />allows landlords to submit alternative mitigation strategies. Under this provision, landlords could <br />permanently relocate tenants to another comparable unit, instead of having to terminate the tenancy <br />which would include providing relocation assistance and being subject to the potential right to return <br />provisions. <br />Relocation Assistance Ordinance Process Options <br />One of the recommendations from the ADS is to streamline the Relocation Assistance Ordinance (RAO) <br />noticing and payment process so it’s easier for rental property owners, managers, and tenants to <br />understand and access. Staff and the Ad Hoc reviewed process and payment options with the focus <br />groups. More detailed information on the proposed relocation assistance process and payment options <br />and feedback from the focus groups can be found in Attachment E. <br />9.A. - Page 68 of 84 <br />173