Rental Housing Committee - Regular Meeting

Oh, you're not on Zoom?

Good evening. Welcome to the 05/22/2025 Rental Housing Committee regular meeting. The meeting is called to order at 07:01PM. Now I will proceed with roll call. Andrea?

One moment please. Okay. All committee members are present.

Feel like we used to do that. All committee members are present. Now we're on yeah. But usually we change the slides by now. Alright. It's now item three, the consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the committee wishes to remove an item for discussion. The purpose of the consent calendar is for the committee to efficiently and quickly consider routine or administrative business items with one motion. Public comment will occur after the discussion. We invite you to submit a speaker card now if you would like to speak on this item during public comment. Would any member of the committee like to pull an item? Robert, you're recognized.

I just want to make a few comments on three three and ask a question on three four.

Okay. I believe that would not just we wouldn't we're not pulling those items off. Those would just be part of the main discussion. Anyone else would like to pull any items off? Seeing none. I now I now invite public comments. In person public comments will be called to speak first. Seeing none. Any member of the public wishing to provide a virtual comment on this item, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press 9 on your phone. Staff will display a countdown timer on the screen.

I do not see any hands. Okay. Moving on. I will now bring back the item for committee action. Okay. Okay. We'll move to Robert with your comments then.

Sure. Okay. So on three three, yeah, I usually like to make some brief comments on the activity report. And let's see, I think we have good numbers on the properties registered and rental housing fees paid at 95%, but it does seem to have plateaued. So I'm still interested sometime into the future if we can understand what the composition of that 5% non compliance both on registered and rental housing fees paid consists of. It's good to see that there's low activity on no fault evictions. Sure.

Are we on mute?

I can hear me. Okay.

Because on the Zoom, usually the captions would show up by now, but there's nothing showing up. There's up.

Alright. To keep going, Trejo's at zero and was which is the tenant relocation assistant ordinance means that we are not having people relocated out of the city that need to be compensated because they're low enough income and we only had one in the last two years. It just means that this is an extremely slow period for redevelopment. Rents on newly built units are only up 6.4 since 2017. That compares to 25% general inflation, so that's a good thing.

And let's see, vacancy and for fully covered units at 17% compared to the 25% still. It means that they're lower than general inflation. Vacancy rates

Can I I'm sorry but apparently we are on mute?

Oh, you think the public can't hear any of this? Absolutely not.

Nothing.

Oh. If Nalisa's on the line, I can't she can't hear anything. Oh, now now we're good.

Yep. Now she can hear.

Okay. You wanna stop stop

Maybe I better start from the beginning. Sorry that, you know, this will take a minute longer than I was expecting. Okay. So I'm making some comments on item 3.3, the activity report. I usually like to comment on this because it's important for many people have asked me that they want to know how things are going and this wonderful report is the best way I know to tell them the answers.

So anyway, one thing is on properties registered in rental housing fees paid. They're both at 95% and that's a good number except that it seems to have plateaued. So I would still like to understand the composition of the 5% non compliance, but that's not an urgent issue. We've discussed it in the past, I'm just mentioning it so that it doesn't go off the radar. I'm glad to see there's low activity on no fault evictions, particularly with regard to withdrawal of units.

And the tenant relocation assistance ordinance was zero for this year and only one for the last two years. It means that in the last three years we've only had two people that needed to be compensated because they had to leave their apartments. And so it means the displacement is at a pretty low rate. Rents on newly built units are only up 6.4% since 2017 cumulatively. That compares with 25% general inflation.

So it means that for newly built units, cost rents and the cost of living are not are becoming less of an issue than other items in the typical basket of things people have to buy. And for fully covered units, it's 17%, still lettuce than general inflation which is a plus. Vacancy rates about 5% for fully covered units and that's normal. So it means that even if you wanted to go out and find a fully covered unit you could probably find one. And it that it isn't that the people who are in the fully covered units are holding onto them and keeping other people from being able to find apartments which is good.

Newly built units at 12.5% vacancy. That's down from 15% so that's an encouraging sign that's moving toward normal. And key issues for the future are how is remote work going to continue to affect things and what will be the effect of AI on tech jobs because tech jobs have a lot to do with how expensive it is to rent an apartment here. So that's all I have to say, thanks.

Alright, does anyone else would like to speak? Alright, recognized.

Forgive me, this is my first time. Beautiful report, use it as an example. My question is when you say total no fault evictions or at fault evictions, does this number include UDs too? Or is it just notices? Oh sorry, unlawful detainer, that's the court action

for It's just including the termination notices, not the termination notice follow-up option which includes UDs.

Would it be possible to report those numbers? I'm hoping they're pretty low because

They're very low.

Much lower than ours. Because I think what would be helpful is to know, to look side by side. Like there's the notices, the work you guys do at your clinic, and how you may be able to stop evictions and to be able

to

show a lower number of forced evictions. That was my only question.

Alright. Seeing no other speakers, a motion is in order. Right. Do you wanna go? I thought you I mean, can

do all

this together. Yeah. Can do all of this together. So you wanna Sure. Vice chair?

Yeah. Let me ask my one question about three four. I had to send in a question asking how it was that an OTUIA petition can lead to a downward adjustment in rent. You know, the example was good in showing me the mechanics of what to do if you got one. But, I'm still trying to understand how does it what circumstances does that happen to make that occur?

Mean, the only thing I can think of is, I know that when we were calculating what the adjustments for rent would be, that you end up maxing the utilities that were paid over the last year with some kind of county level maximum or something like that. Is that how that occurs to cause a downward adjustment of rent? But what I wanna know is what are the circumstances that cause that? Because obviously if you got a question in from a landlord asking about it, it means it can happen. So maybe if it's easy to clarify, help me understand how it happens. That's what I was trying to get at.

So in this process, we ended up with two comparator numbers for the petition adjustment. We have the calculation for the Mountain View calculation that the committee chose which is based on the number of rooms in the unit and a few other things. And then we have the county comparator from the housing authority which calculates a number of things on a very large chart. When you when the RHC determined the regulations they chose to choose between those two numbers the lesser of those two numbers. That is where the actual adjustment is coming from.

It does not come from the average of what the utility costs were through rubs for each unit.

Okay.

So if you have that number, whichever one of those numbers that is, we then compare it to the average of the utility for the the utility provision for the unit for that same time period. And whichever one based on that, it's either an upward adjustment or a downward adjustment. So it's literally comparing the adjustment number to the utility average over the course of that year.

Okay.

And because of that, it can go up or down. So it's not when you're thinking of it, it's not the rent that's going up or down. Right? So if the if we like in the example, it shows $1,000 for the rent Mhmm. Plus whatever the utility adjustment is becomes the new total rent. Mhmm. That utility adjustment amount is what we're looking at to determine if it's an upward adjustment or a downward adjustment.

So, I mean, the utility adjustment, can it actually be a negative number then?

Well, compared to the utility average

Oh.

It is, it can be less than the utility average that was used by that tenant.

So it can be less than what the tenant was paying on average monthly? Mhmm. Because we're the way rubs was allocated to each tenant may be different from the way we are allocating it through the petition process.

Okay. So the the main thing I'm trying to understand is that it seems that when you have an adjustment, I mean, because the intuitively, if they're paying something for the utilities and the utilities get included in the rent and they weren't included during rubs, Or are we saying

The the tenant's always been paying the utilities, but they've been paying them through a RUBS system.

Okay. Get it.

That's the issue. So they've been paying, but they've been paying through an allocation that doesn't necessarily reflect their actual use and maybe using an algorithm that would allocate more utilities to that tenant than if you just allocated them equally per bedroom, which is or per room, which is what your process does.

Right. Okay. I understand it now. Thanks for the clarification.

I would just like to test my understanding as well on the same issue. So when we're talking about the change in rent where you have a new rent that includes the utilities as calculated, and the prior rent, if it didn't include utilities, we're adding in the average utilities to the prior rent.

We're not adding in the average utilities, we're adding in the calculation from whichever whichever option was less lesser. From the prior? So you in the regulations you have two options for the

I think I understand that.

So what I'm the average, the average usage is not what's being added onto the rent.

In the current for the new rent.

But when we're determining whether it's upward or downward, we're taking that premises rent number plus the average utility number and comparing it to the premises rent plus the adjusted utility number.

So in coming up with what was the existing rent before the the one time utility adjustment, we are taking the rent without utility and adding an average utility cost.

Based on what the tenant actually paid for the last twelve months. Thank you. Yeah.

Alright. Member Brown, recognized.

So rent includes utilities. Right? Rent?

Correct.

So over a year, the amount that someone pays in the base rent and the utilities is their total rent paid for that year. And with the calculations that we do through the one time utility adjustment process, we've changed the future projected allocation of utilities for that unit on top of the base rent that they're assumed. And that could either be greater or lesser than the previous year's

Average.

Correct. So it

can either go up or down based on the floating changes over time. And that's it. That's that and then that says upward adjustment or downward adjustment.

Correct.

And if it's a downward adjustment, that's not a rent It does not trigger a rent increase, and that's the thing that we are codifying. We don't we don't have it doesn't it's not a magical circumstance that also then lets them that lets do an out of band rent adjustment that they would otherwise not be entitled to.

So basically what these regulations are saying is if it's a downward adjustment, the property owner is not entitled to give an AGA if they haven't given an if they've given an AGA within the past twelve months.

It it it doesn't reset a clock of any Correct.

Yes. That's exactly right.

Okay. Thank you.

Alright. Seeing no other discussion, we have a motion in the floor that's by member Brown, seconded by vice chair Cox. Member Brown, would you like to say the motion?

I would like to move the consent calendar items.

Can you please

Are there any that I have to read the titles of?

You have to read the titles of all of them.

Okay. I would like to move that we approve the minutes for the April. That we receive the community stabilization fair rent act and mobile home rent stabilization ordinance financial expenditures for fiscal year twenty twenty four twenty five through 03/31/2025. We received the rent stabilization division fiscal year twenty twenty four twenty five activity report through March 2025 and that we received the report on the notification of minor clarification in CSFRA regulations chapter 13 utility charges as we just discussed.

Alright. Any discussion on the motion? I see none. Motion passes unanimously. We will now open the meeting for oral communications from the public. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the committee on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to three minutes during this section. State law prohibits the committee from acting on non agenda items. Would any member of the public like to provide comment on non agenda items? If you'd like to speak on this item in person, please submit a speaker card to city staff now.

In person public comments, call to speak first. To any member of the public wishing to provide a virtual comment on this item, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star nine on your phone. Staff will display a countdown timer on the screen. Seeing no one in person, seeing no hands on Zoom. All right. We will now move to agenda item 5.1, fiscal year twenty twenty five, twenty six budgets and annual fees for the community stabilization and fair rent act and mobile home rent stabilization ordinance. Public comment will occur after the presentation item and committee questions. We invite you to submit a speaker card now if you know you would like to speak on this item during public comment. We will begin with a presentation from staff.

Thank you, chair and committee members. This is a continuance of discussion that we had in our previous meeting in April, whereby the rental housing committee reviewed the draft budgets and had no changes recommended. So today, we're hoping to adopt a resolution approving the fiscal year twenty five-twenty six budgets for the CSFRA and the MHRSO and establishing a rental housing fee and space rental fee for the next fiscal year. The Rental Housing Committee is implementing the CSFRA and MHRZO and has the power and duties to establish and approve a budget for each fiscal year, as noted in the following sections in the CSFRA and the MHRZO. As I mentioned, on April 24, the rental housing committee reviewed and accepted the recommended budgets with no changes.

And there is one note, there is a change in the city's budgeting process, and therefore, costs of $4,600 to the CSFRA and $800 to the MHRSO have been added under the professional development item. And this also caused a small adjustment in the 20% reserve item. This is the draft budget as was presented last year and the numbers in red represent the different numbers adding the $4,600 in the CSFRE budget here, bringing the reserves to $518,000.71 with an ending balance of 66,181 million. And this is an overview of the CSFR budget with the key items. The operating expenses come out to EUR $2,330,636 The city administration and interfund expenses and $259,720 and the reserves, as I mentioned before, 518 and 71.

The rental housing fee was discussed last time, and the proposed $130 per unit, which comes out to $10.83 per month, as a result of the approved budget. So, here we have the MHRSO budget with the numbers in red that have been changed. Dollars 800 have been added to the operating expenses bringing the reserve to 59,949. So, the MHRSO budget operating expenses amount to $262,013 the city administration and interfund to 37,007 and $30 and the reserves, 59,949. And the MHRSO space rental fee comes out to 142 annually or $11.83 a month, and this reflects the 50% fee level reduction as previously discussed.

The adoption of these budgets will provide appropriations for the operation of the CSFRA and MHRSO programs. CSFRA is 100% cost recovery program and fully funded by the fees. And as mentioned previously, the MHRZO is also a cost recovery program and funded by the fees, but the program for next fiscal year is supplemented by the city's general fund in an amount of $50,000 Once approved, these budgets will be forwarded to finance and administrative services department for incorporation in the citywide fiscal year twenty five-twenty six budget process. So the recommendation is to adopt a resolution approving the fiscal year twenty five-twenty six budgets for the CSFRA and the MHRO and establishing the rental housing fees and space rental fees for next year. This concludes the presentation.

Happy to answer any questions.

All right. Do any members of the committee have any questions? Seeing none, since there are no questions, now invite public comments. In person public comments will be called to speak first. Any member of the public wishing to provide virtual comment on this item, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press 9 on your phone. Staff will display a countdown timer on the screen. Seeing no hands raised. Next, we will go into committee deliberations and feedback. Would any member of the committee like to propose a motion? I see Robert, vice chair Cox, and seconded by member Hizlop. Would you like to say the motion?

I move that we accept the fiscal year twenty twenty five, twenty twenty six budgets and annual fees for community stabilization fair rent act and home rent stabilization ordinance changes to adopt a resolution of the Rental Housing Committee of the Mountain View approving the fiscal twenty twenty five-twenty six budgets for the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act and the Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance in establishing the rental housing fee and space rental fee for fiscal year twenty twenty five, twenty six to be I'm reading it. Okay. That's it.

Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing none. Motion passes unanimously. We will now move on to agenda item 5.2, amendments to the CSFRA and MHRSO regulations chapter two definitions. Pres public comment will occur after the presentation item and committee questions. We'll begin with a presentation from staff.

Thank you. So the purpose of this item is to repeat review and approve amendments to CSFRA and MHRSO regulations Chapter two, which is the definitions chapter addressing certain fees charged by landlords for attendance requested reporting of positive rental payment information. As you all might remember back in oh, sorry. The Rental Housing Committee is empowered to establish rules and regulations for the administration and enforcement of both the MHRs, and the CSFRA. Getting into the reasoning for this background, if you all remember back in January and February, we did a review legislative updates to landlord tenant law and amongst those was Assembly Bill 2,747, which went into effect on January 1.

And this requires most landlords to offer their tenants, any of the tenants who are responsible for the payment of rent under the lease, the option of having positive rental payment information reported to a nationwide consumer reporting agency. And there's noticing requirements around this and also timelines by which they need to make this offer. This bill is intended to provide an opportunity for tenants to enhance their credit scores through consistent payment of rent. And the bill actually allows landlords to charge a fee for the time it and efforts basically that it takes or the cost of providing this service to the tenants. And that fee is the lesser of the landlord's actual costs or $10 per month.

And under AB 2,747, the fees that a landlord charges for the positive rental payment information reporting cannot be the basis of an eviction. So if a tenant fails to pay that fee, then they cannot be evicted for the failure. The landlord just merely gets to stop providing the service, and it also cannot be deducted from this tenant's security deposit if they don't pay the fee. So really, it's not treated as rent under the the statute. We can go to the next one.

I think I already said this. So this raised a question from property owners about how the requirement under AB 2,747 to provide this service and the ability to charge a fee interacts with the CFRA and MHRSO's limitations on rent increases. So basically, the questions that were raised is whether these fees constitute rent under the CFRA and MHRSO. And if they do, whether landlords and tenants have to submit a joint petition for additional housing services each time that a tenant elects to opt into the service. So in order to address these questions, staff is recommending adding language to Chapter two of the regulations for both MHRSO and CSFRA clarifying that the fees that are charged by a landlord for the provision of positive rental payment credit reporting are not considered rent under the CFRA and MHRSO and that the positive rent payment credit reporting itself is not considered a housing service.

And so the recommendation is to review and approve these amendments to the CFRA and MHRSO regulations Chapter two, addressing certain fees charged by landlords for attendance requested reporting of positive rental payment information. I'm happy to take any questions.

Thank you. Now we move on to questions from committee members. So if any committee members want to provide a question? Alternate Ball.

Yeah. Thank you. I thank you. It makes sense. Are there any other examples of fees in the city of Mountain View that landlords and tenants voluntarily choose to transact for lack of a better term that that this joins that category or is this the first of category?

This is the first that I can think of. I mean tenants typically pay their PG and E directly to PG and E and so that's not really it. That's only the only other situation where it doesn't really fall within the definition of rent, but it's related to a tenancy. I can't think of anything else, but I don't know.

Yeah. I can't think of any mandated, you know, this is in the statutes.

Right.

So I can't think of any mandated. And and there is a bill currently pending to basically limit the ability of landlords to just tack on fees because they do it not because there's a statutory provision, but it was a way of increasing rent. Sure. So just adding fees.

So so at the moment, this is a unique provision, a a definition specifically specifically to accommodate the statute, but we don't really know of any other such examples at this time.

No. Okay. None that we can think of.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Alright. Member Keating?

So I just wanted to check that, for example, a pet fee that would be considered a housing service and part of rent? Thank you. That's great.

Member Brown?

Thank you, chair.

And

that would be a housing service because if they did not choose to do it, they could get evicted for their behavior otherwise? I guess directly tied to their residency? Is that what differentiates

Which one

are you talking about? Pet fees.

Pet fee? Yeah. Well the pet fee is statutorily. You know,

this

is a statute. Landlords are allowed to charge this fee. A pet fee is something landlords voluntarily charge. It's not authorized by statute, and we define it as a housing service in the CSFRA and the MHRSO.

Okay. Thank you. Member. Islip?

Very Just to clarify. So in the statute itself or in the bill, it says it's not part of rent. It's defined. Or is that something we're doing in

in Yeah. So it does directly say that it's not rent, but it's not treated as rent. A tenant can't be evicted for the failure to pay it. It can't come out of a security deposit. And basically, the only consequence the tenant faces for their failure to pay this fee is that the landlord stops report, know, stops the positive rental payment reporting, and they can't request that the landlord start reporting again for a certain amount of time.

And so, you know, based on staff's assessment, it's not really being treated as rent. And it also just would create a lot of complication because the statute gives the tenant the option to like opt in and out of this at any time. And so if each time they decided to opt in or out, they had to do a joint petition, it would just be quite a onerous process for both the landlord and tenant, and we want to make it something that tenants can really be able to utilize this, you know, the ability to have this positive rental payment information reported.

Yeah, I just wanted to clearly understand this is kind of coming from the definition in this or the the how it's characterized in the statute, and I'm not aware of anything else that's like this and for rental housing. Thank you.

Seeing no other questions, I now invite public comment. Any member of the public wishing to provide virtual comment on this item, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or press star nine on your phone. Staff will display a countdown timer on the screen. Seeing no hands, we will now go into committee deliberation and feedback. A there has been a motion started by vice chair Cox. There a second in the motion? Seconded by Member Keating. Vice Chair Cox, would you like to read the motion? Motion

is to yeah. First I just wanna make a comment and that's that I just I do agree you made the right call on this. This is sufficiently different than other things that are covered in the CSFRA that it deserves this kind of special treatment and it is actually to the benefit of everyone to have this not tied in with the other things with the CSFRA and MHRSO. So I am making a motion to approve the amendments to the Computity Stabilization and Fair Rent Act regulations and Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance Regulation chapter two definitions addressing certain fees charged by landlords for a tenant's requested reporting of their positive rental payment information.

Alrighty. Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, we will go with the vote. Vote is unanimous. Thank you.

Unanimous in approval. Alright. We will now move on to agenda 5.3, rental housing committee meeting scheduled for fiscal year twenty five twenty six. Public comments will occur after the presentation item and committee questions. We will begin with a presentation from staff.

So the purpose of this agenda item is to set the dates for the rental housing committee meetings for fiscal year twenty five, twenty six. And this comes from the CSFRE section seventeen oh nine F and MHRSO section 46.9. Requesting an adoption of an annual meeting schedule. So the meeting schedule is proposed as follows, trying to follow as much the fourth Thursday of the month. In the holiday months, it switches to the third Thursday of the month.

And then in June, it switches to the second Thursday of the month. So, the recommendation is to deliberate on this schedule and see if that fits within your personal agendas. That's the end of the presentation.

Alright. We will now move on to questions from committee members. Does any member have question? Please please leave it to a question and not a comment in the form of a question. Asher, you recognize member Hizlip?

I know I this question in advance about the and the reason I ask is because there's typically a meeting I have to attend on the second Thursday, but it's not critical. I'm here. And I get it that for the second Thursday in June, you have to tie it with the Mountain View City budget and it's probably cutting it a little too close to the third.

That's correct.

Sounds fine. Now we will go to public comment. Any member of the public wishing to provide virtual comment on this item, please click the raised hand button on Zoom or press star nine on your phone. Staff will display a countdown timer on the screen. I'm seeing no one raising their hands. Therefore, we will go to committee deliberations and feedback. Would any member of the committee like to speak? Vice chair Cox.

Yeah. Just one thing. On the June meeting, I mean, you know, if I would not be adverse to moving it to a Wednesday if it turned out that meant that committee member Hislop would be able to attend. But I mean, I don't know whether staff or the room are available. So I mean, any

thoughts We have to check that if if the the facilities are available and if all the staff is available that usually attends these meetings.

Okay. Mhmm. I I guess the other thing about it is is that, you know, I I really would like to keep it to the second week because those are our six weeks of vacation and you know, I didn't want that to get broken up. I, the other question that I have is, you know, somebody had said we might talk about a 6PM start time and so I'm asking, are there people who wanna talk about it? And I don't have anything to say upfront until I've heard what other people say about it. So I'll take my request to speak out.

Alternate Balch.

And that is my comment. I love the idea of a 06:00 start time. Someone asked the question. It was answered by staff that there's really no problem with that. So I am in favor of a 06:00 start time.

Alright. Member Brown? Same. Member Hislop?

Yeah. I forgot. I'm the one that asked that. So and I didn't mention that before. So, yeah. I'd be in favor too.

Neutral.

Vice chair Cox are recognized?

Yeah. Just I I can go either way. I can see pluses or minuses, but, like, I'm flexible as member Keating is, and so I well, defer. Deter.

Defer would be correct. Alright. I see no other comments on this item. Does anyone want to propose the motion? Alright. We have a motion moved by member Hislop. Would you like to say the motion? Do

I have to make an amendment for the start time? Just make the motion.

You have to say it. You can include it as

part the that includes changing the start time to adopt the resolution and change the start time.

This is very exciting for me. It's my first time here. Okay, I move that we adopt a resolution of the rental housing committee of the city of Mountain View to set the dates for the rental housing committee meetings for fiscal year 2025 to 2026 as noted on exhibit a with an amendment that the meeting start times are now at 6PM.

Motion made by member Hizlov, seconded by member Brown. Are there any is there any further discussion on this motion? Seeing none, we will go to vote. Motion was voted unanimously in favor of the motion.

I just wanna mention that the next meeting is still at seven 7PM, and then in the new fiscal year, the new schedule start.

Alright. We will now move on to agenda item 5.4, fiscal year twenty four twenty five, rental housing committee work plan. Public comment will occur after the presentation item and committee questions. We'll begin with a presentation from staff.

A very short one again. So the purpose of this agenda item is to review and provide input on the Rental Housing Committee fiscal year work plan. And the Rental Housing Committee, like other committees in the city, sets an annual work plan to guide the business of the Rental Housing Committee in providing a schedule of recurring and anticipated new items and an estimated timeline. So, it includes items on as needed basis, such as appeal hearings and adoption and review of policies and regulations. It also includes recurring items such as the budget review on an annual basis, the setting of the AGA, and updates on CSRE and MHROZO programs.

And it also includes new items that the Rental Housing Committee may want to bring forward in the coming months. And if needed, this work plan can be modified during the year. And I try to include the annual work plan on the slides. We'll do three months at a time for your review if you have any questions. And the recommendation is for the Rental Housing Committee to review and provide input to staff on this work plan. Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, staff. Now we will move on to questions from committee members. Vice Chair Cox, you're organized.

Thank you. So here, I see two big items, I guess I would call harassment study session and the review of the MNOI. What's that?

Yeah, you're speaking side.

Oh, okay. There we go. Okay, so I see two major items on the work plan other than regular items and appeals coming up. One is the study session for the anti harassment policy and the other one is the review of the MNOI and petition process. And so on the anti harassment stuff, I'm wondering like is that you have in the schedule just the initial study session and then based on what comes out of it there will be other study sessions or public hearing? What, I mean are we planning to finish that in this year?

Yeah, so as you can see then in the January work plan, as shown on the slide, under January, you can see then that the regulations will be presented to the rental housing committee for adoption, depending on what the rental housing committee is reviewing and giving feedback on in the earlier session.

Got it. And just so that I understand, you know, this review of the MNOI and petition process, this is where, you know, I remember watching the council meeting and the council had asked for us to, you know, review these changes that were requested by the landlords in the mobile home ordinance Is it only the mobile home ordinance, or was it also the CFRA?

So, there was not a specific request for changes, yes. So, this topic came up when the city council discussed the AGA for the MHR and they only referred to the appeal and petition process for the MHR zone.

Okay, okay, but I mean the idea there is that we would be looking at what is the proposal and recommending some, whether we would recommend some changes to it.

Well, there is no specific proposal. They just want us to review the efficiency of the process. So, what we imagine this would be an explanatory memo on how the process actually works.

Mhmm.

And then discuss with the rental housing committee first.

Mhmm.

See if any changes are warranted or not.

Okay.

Depending on the rental housing committee's feedback, then that will be presented to the city council.

I understand now. Thank you for the clarification.

Any other questions from members? Seeing none, I now invite public comment. Any member of the public wishing to provide a virtual comment on this item, that being the work plan, please click the raised hand button in Zoom or press 9 on your phone. Seeing none, we will go into committee deliberations and feedback. Vice chair Cox. Okay. No. No. Member his no. Anyone else wanna give any kind of comments or any changes to the work plan?

We do not need to make a motion on this. So if we see nothing, that's it for this item. Alright. We will now move on to committee staff announcements and updates. Staff?

Thank you. Alright. So we'll take first a look at our upcoming events and workshops. Again, as always, we do continue to keep our virtual office hours every Tuesday from 10AM to noon, and that's joinable at the link on the screen. And then upcoming workshops for the next month, we have next week, an understanding utility adjustment petition tenant focused virtual workshop in the evening at 06:30.

And then in June, we have a rent stabilization one zero one hybrid workshops, and that would be on Zoom, and it's also in the community center in the Maple Room. And then also at the same j, we have a submitting a utility adjustment petition. However, this is landlord focused and that will be virtual at 2PM. And we are continuing to keep our landlord help center hours every Thursday for the foreseeable future as a lot of assistance is needed with the utility adjustment petition. So we're maintaining a lot of direct office hours and contact with our landlords.

And that's both in person and online from one to three every Thursday, and they can also get help with anything else in tenant landlord related. And our tenant help center is the first and third Thursday. These are in the evenings to accommodate people's working schedules. So that's from six to 8PM at our office on Escuela and also on Zoom. And we have our staff present as well as CSA and someone from Clespa to answer eviction and other legal type questions.

And the mediation program is there as well. And then just to highlight, last Saturday we had our fourth annual summer kickoff event. So you'll see our top left photo there, we have some of our rental housing committee members. We had Chair Ma, Vice Chair Cox and committee member Keating is kind of hiding there in the bottom left. But they were all there to give out the raffle prizes which was quite popular and everybody had a great time with that.

We had probably over four fifty attendees so every year it just keeps notching up a little bit more and we're adding a little a little bit more activities and it's getting more popular. So we just continue to look forward to that. If you'll see on the next slide, there's some some fun Mickey and Minnie. There's Anki and our chalk contest, and we had a wonderful a wonderful Spanish dance troupe coming and doing a presentation as well. So just to highlight that.

Any any questions or comments about events?

It was great.

Thank you. Alrighty. Then just to close out the meeting, we have some expected future agenda items. So next rental housing committee will be June 12, and we'll look forward to having an appeal hearing as well as approving some of our larger contracts including Goldfarb and Littmann and Project Sentinel. That concludes the presentation.

Are there any additional comments or announcements from any committee members or any other staff? Member Hislop.

Thanks. I've heard about the fire at Oak Street Apartments. We're a member of that property. So I just was wondering, you know, if you guys have any updates about family.

Yeah. We're we are in communication with the property owner and the property manager today. We we got in contact with them, so we're working working with them through that.

Because I if I recall correctly, it used to be a very elderly gentleman, but maybe it's passed on. So do you know if it's I guess this was just sort of my curiosity. I was concerned. I I used to talk to some of those residents.

Yeah. They've hired a property management company, and they manage quite a few properties in Mountain View, so they're on top of it.

Seeing no other comments or questions from committee members. The meeting is adjourned at 07:52PM. The next round of housing committee meeting is scheduled to be held on Thursday, June 12 at 7PM. Good evening.