Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - CC - 1979.06.193E1 L- BURLINGAME CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING June L9, 1979 CALI, TO ORDER A special meeting of the Burlingame City Council was held on June 79, L979, in the City HalI Council Chambers. The meeting was ca1led to order by Mayor Irving S. Amstrup at 8:05 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Cit.y Manager Charles SchwaIm. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers present: AMSTRUPT BARTON, CROSBY, M}..RTIN Councilmembers absent: IIANGINI (excused) PROPOSED RENT CONTROL ORDINANCE Mayor Amstrup announced the purpose of the public meeting was for consideration of the proposed ordinance prepared by the City Attorney at Council's request and previously discussed by Council at its study meeting of June 6th. He asked the City Attorney to review the ordin- ance so those present would know its contents. City Attorney Jerome F. Coleman outlined each section of the pro- posed ordinance. Its purpose is to establ-ish a rent control com- mission which lvi1l function similarly to other city commissions and whose actions will be subject to appeal to the City Council. The Commission would adopt rules and regulations subject to Council appr oral for the stabilization of rent using as base rental that of July \,1978, provide for an annual percentage rent i-ncrease based upon a price index, aIlow for the pass through of increased costs, and provide for hearing process for adjustments. There is a pro- vision for exemption for smalI buildings with one unit owner- occupied, newly constructed units and luxury units. Leased prem- ises would be exempt until- the lease termi-nates, with the last month's rental fixed as the base rent. Administration will be by the City Manager throuqh the Director of Finance, with provision that administration may be contracted out. An attempt is made to remove rent control employees from crvil service'fringe benefits. A fee of $7.50 per resi-dential unit is set for the fir:st year, to be adjusted with the approval of the City Council thereafter, and there is a provision for filing fees payable by individuals re- questing hearings. The section on evictions was amended as re- quested by Council and. now makes it a defense if eviction results from an attempt to enforce compliance with the ordinance but re- tains the provisions concerning retaliatory actions. The final section of the ordinance provides it will expire on July 1, 198I, unless extended by Council or superseded by state law. fn response to Councilwoman Barton's question, Mr, Coleman stated that Council may (1) decide to take no action, (2) hear comments and postpone action t ot (3) determine now or at a later date toput the ordinance or an amended ordinance on the baIIot. If there are two propositions on the ballot, one the j-nitiative and the other the ordinance from Council, and both receive a majority of votes, the one receiving more votes will pass i if neither receives a majority of votes cast, neither will pass. Mayor Amstrup opened the rneeting for public comment. MR. JOSEPH KARP of 1103 Juanita Avenue questioned 1978 r ds the base date instead of January L, 1979 , usein of July l, the Concerned r-F-@ffiE? 382 Citizens' initiative, calling attention to the rise in the con- sumer price index between those dates. MRS. DOROTHY SCHINDER of 117 Park Road pointed out the housing problems of the disadvantaged living on rental subsj-dies,particularly the reluctance of property owners to rent when a government contract is required. MR. JOHN COCKROFT of t25O Jackling Drive, a property owner, -owner of rental property and real property manager, speaking on behalf of the people he represents and himself, said they are a1l opposed to rent controf in Burlingame. He said a basic right in the United States is to own real property and have its independent and free use as long as j-t doesnrt interfere with neighbors. He believes that rent control will bring appeals to Council from everyone who has a housing problem, whether or not it is related to the issues of rent control. He cited several communi-ties where private property regulation has extended to regulation of the right of free sale of a one-family residence. JOSEPH KARP again addressed Council. He cited his moderate rent increases, and added that he believes the current situation was generated because of friction between one owner and tenants, and out-of-town forces then became involved. He said he did not believe that a group of 50 or 100 people who have a problem should influence the entire community. MS. SCHINDER suggested a commission, to which both the owner and tenant could come, might negate the need for rent control, adding that people are crying out for help. MR. BRUCE KIRKBRfDE, a resident of San Mateo, requested use of the later base date because the city ordinance should not be more severe than that of the Concerned Renters. MR. DAVID ADLER of l-42I- Bellevue, said he hadn't raised rents in his building si-nce December, L977, and he felt rent control portends more government control. MR. JIM WAGER of 1060 Carolan, said rent control is not the first step in control, it was preceded by zoning 1aws, taxation and other forrns of government intervention, which are often prompted by injustices. Under a free economy there would be many high- rise apartment buildings in Burlingame. MS. BETTY LILLIENTHAL of 309 Lorton, and MS. SYLVIA NUSSMAN of 1415 Floribunda voiced cbjections to statements about general public disinterest in rent control. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Amstrup pointed out that the frequent statement that rent control is necessary for retired persons is fallacious in that an annual increase of 7eo or more would quickly become a problem to those on fixed income. A better solution to their problem would be a state or national sulqiidy for older people. There was Council discussion of the base rent date change to January 1, 1979, and it was brought out that July L, L978, was used to coincide with the effective date of Jarvis-Gann and that,time would be taken into account. Counci-lman Crosby stated thaL, as other councilmembers, he was not in favor of a rent control ordinance, but the Council had been asked to consider an ordinance more equitable than the initiative ordinance. It will be the voters who will decide whether or not rent control should be in effect in Burlingame. L---^ !.a-.$ri a4--lre.!. .' i rri. 9()?rl(J d Councilman Martin pointed out the disadvantage of the enactment of ambiguous legislation by the initiative process because it can be changed only by further voter action. He advocated support for Assembly Bill 81 which proposes a $300 subsidy forrenters instead of $37.50. Councilwoman Barton voiced opposition to a City rent control ordinance on the baIlot because this may give the impressionthat the Council supports the ordinance. Both I'[r. Karp and Mr. Cockcroft objected to tvro ordinances being placed on the bal1ot because of possible voter confusion and because they believed the issue could more easily be defeatedif there were only one on the bal1ot. Mr. Karp said he believedthat landlords who had not gouged are entitled to some of the economic benefits from the Jarvis-Gann Arnendment. Council expressed regret that there had been only minimalpublic comment about the provisions of the ordinance underconsideration. It was the unanimous decision of councilmembersrthat since action on an ordinance is not required until August, to postpone further consiCeration. It{ayor Amstrup adjourned the meeting at 9:27 p.m. fur"-7r{rzlttCity cferk