An earlier proposal by council members Nikki Fortunato Bas and Dan Kalb had sought to phase out the moratorium gradually beginning in September, and it would have forced landlords to prove that their lease-violating tenants “caused substantial actual damage.”And to the dismay of some renters, two others on the council — Janani Ramachandran and Kevin Jenkins — secured the removal of the “substantial damage” language, arguing that it would duplicate Oakland’s existing laws.
Those who still need help with rent will be directed to the city’s rental assistance program, which council members on Tuesday said has not been fully utilized. “This allows people to get evicted for not covering 75% of their floors with carpets — I had that in my lease,” said William Wilcox, an Oakland resident who works in affordable-housing services. “Having a small dog your landlord already knew about, having a party one time — this allows unreasonable standards to evict people.”
“I’ve always been pro-tenant, and I find myself in this weird position: What am I?” Kirk said. “Am I a small landlord? Am I despicable, horrible corporate being? What happens when I’m forced to house someone against my will, in my home, for three years?” “What we’re doing today is going to discourage those that may have had an interest, who had an extra room,” Gallo said, “because they don’t want to get into a situation that we’re here today.”
“For folks who are saying that this is slavery, shame on you; how dare you,” Fife, who is Black, had said. “I don’t want to hear another white, yellow, whatever person talk about what my ancestors experienced being enslaved and making that akin to being a landlord — never again.”