Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 of 7 <br />City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road, Redwood City, CA. 94063 Tel: 650-780-7000 www.redwoodcity.org <br />ANALYSIS <br />Overview of the Proposed Ordinance <br />The Proposed Ordinance, if approved, would repeal existing Chapter 42 - Tenant Protection of the <br />Redwood City Code3 and adopt a new Chapter 42 – Redwood City Fair and Affordable Housing Ordinance <br />establishing the following: <br />Rent stabilization (also known as rent control) <br />Tenant protections, including: <br />o Just causes for eviction <br />o Right to return and first right of refusal <br />o Relocation assistance <br />o Anti-harassment protections <br />Rent Stabilization and Tenant Protections Program <br />Funding mechanisms to finance the program <br />Rent stabilization petition and hearing process <br />See Table 2 in the initial 9212 Report (Attachment D) for a comparison summary of current law and the <br />Proposed Ordinance. <br />Supplemental 9212 Report <br />Staff is recommending the City Council receive the supplemental 9212 Report (Attachment C) and below <br />summarizes the key findings. <br />1.The proposed Ordinance’s impacts on Redwood City’s housing market extend beyond the rent <br />stabilization requirements and include additional provisions that increase operating costs and <br />financial risks related to building repairs, rehabilitation, and redevelopment and related tenant <br />just cause eviction, relocation, and right to return provisions. Although Costa-Hawkins limits <br />which units can be subject to local rent caps, all the non-rent control provisions would apply more <br />broadly, including just cause eviction protections, relocation assistance, right-to-return <br />requirements, tenant safety plans, rental registry requirements, fees, and enforcement. These <br />provisions—particularly relocation payments, tenant safety plans, the petition and appeal <br />process, and right-to-return obligations—may make substantial rehabilitation, re-syndication, <br />withdrawal, or demolition for redevelopment more difficult to underwrite. <br />2.The greatest impacts are likely to fall on older multi-family buildings, “mom and pop” owners, <br />and affordable housing providers, particularly those subject to the proposed Ordinance’s rent <br />control provisions because they operate properties built prior to 1995 (about 40 percent of the <br />City’s rental stock). These properties generally have less flexibility to absorb new costs because <br />they are more likely to have older building systems, master-metered utilities, limited <br />administrative capacity, restricted rents, or existing affordable housing compliance obligations. <br />3 As mentioned earlier, the Proposed Ordinance states it will repeal Chapter 42A - Minimum Lease Terms for <br />Residential Units, but that Chapter no longer exists. <br />8.A. - Page 3 of 168 <br />13