Archive for the ‘Real Estate’ Category

Antioch Council unanimously approves renter protection Just Cause Eviction ordinance

Tuesday, August 27th, 2024

By Allen D. Payton

Adding to the tenant protections previously passed, during their meeting on Tuesday, August 27, 2024, on a 5-0 vote, the Antioch City Council approved a Just Cause Eviction ordinance limiting the ability of landlords to evict tenants except for specific reasons and, if they do, the landlord must give notice to both the tenant and the City and pay for the tenant’s relocation costs. The ordinance was negotiated between representatives of tenants, community organizations, the apartment owners’ association, city council and staff members.

According to the city staff report on the item, State law requires “just cause” for a landlord to evict a tenant who has continuously and lawfully occupied a residence for at least 12 months. The California Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (“TPA”) limits rent increases and places restrictions on landlords’ ability to evict tenants, unless the eviction is as a result of a “just cause” that is defined by state law. The TPA also imposes certain notice and language requirements, “Just cause” includes “at-fault” evictions for wrongful or malicious conduct by tenants and “no-fault” evictions, such as when a property owner or their immediate family move into an otherwise occupied unit, remove a unit from the rental market, or when a landlord intends to demolish or “substantially remodel” a unit.

The city’s ordinance extends the time to 24 months after eviction for the former tenant to have first-right-of-refusal be offered from the landlord to rent the unit, again, without an increase in rent more than the allowable increases under state law and city ordinances.

In addition, under the City’s ordinance, if the tenant hasn’t done anything wrong, but the landlord is asking them to move out, then they must both notify the city and pay for the tenant’s relocation costs, in an “amount equal to two times the Tenant’s monthly rent in effect when the Landlord served the notice to terminate the tenancy.”

The city staff report claims the ordinance will require an additional city staff member and “increased future workloads for the City Attorney’s Office related to new inquiries and requests for services from tenants and landlords.”

For the public hearing there was only a proponent to speak in favor of the ordinance, but no opponent to speak against it. The proponent, an attorney, said, “Under Antioch’s new ordinance, everyone has just cause for eviction protections,” speaking specifically of renters.

Several members of the public spoke in favor of the ordinance, including representatives of ACCE Action and Rising Juntos Antioch and two council candidates in District 3, Addison Peterson and Antwon Webster.

During council member discussion of the ordinance, District 1 Councilwoman Torres-Walker said, “Now everyone in Antioch is covered.”

“Thank you all for pushing us,” Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson said. “We finally made it, but we have to keep on keeping them honest.”

Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe thanked, “the attorneys and everyone who participated in the meetings. This is a big deal for the community.” He mentioned it took almost four years to get the ordinance developed and adopted.

Following council discussion, the ordinance passed on a unanimous vote.

The audience erupted with cheers and shouts of, “Si, se puede” which means, “yes, we can.”

See City of Antioch Just Cause Eviction ordinance.

Major changes in how consumers purchase and sell their homes

Tuesday, August 6th, 2024

By Patrick McCarran, Real Estate Broker

There is a major change coming in the real estate world that will completely reshape how buyers purchase their home. What will the settlement mean for homebuyers and homesellers?

Traditionally Owners have hired an agent to sell their property and negotiated a commission. By making it a percentage it gives the agent incentive to maximize the sales price, this is a very common practice with money management, talent agents, etc. The listing agent would then offer an offer of compensation from their commission to act as a finder’s fee and to broaden the scope and market of the property, this was the function of the MLS.

Starting in August 2024 this will no longer be allowed, due to a class action settlement with a private party and supported by the DOJ the selling agent will no longer be able to offer a finder’s fee on the MLS. The new system will shift agent compensation and place the Buyers on their own. This will give the Buyer the options of hiring a real estate agent, or a lawyer, or representing themselves.  A written agreement will be required for Realtor representation for both in-person and live virtual home tours. This currently only applies to Realtors but there is a state law in the legislature to apply to ALL real estate licensees. The Buyer will now be responsible for paying for their representation. There is as always no set price for representation and this will be up to the individual to negotiate.

Sellers will be allowed to pay for the Buyer’s agent if they choose by offering concessions on the MLS. The buyer can then choose to distribute the money according to their needs towards closing costs or Realtor fees. While listing commission fees have always been negotiable with the changing dynamic the fee structure will most likely change. As a Seller it will be up to you to negotiate what you wish to pay to sell your home and what will be the most advantageous.  The Seller will decide if they wish to pay and how much to the Buyer’s agent. The Seller and their agent will need to work out if they are comfortable with their agent representing an unrepresented buyer and what the additional fee for the listing agent to represent the Buyer in that scenario.

While doing it yourself may sound like a great idea and instant savings, bypassing an agent’s services may not lead to direct savings, especially for first time buyers, the home buying process can get very complicated and having a great local agent to negotiate and guide you can give you a competitive advantage.

Consumers will still be able to view Open Houses without a written agreement and may tour with the listing agent if the listing agent business practices allow. Buyer will have option to sign exclusive agreements or open agreement which will be up to the consumer and their Realtor. The Multiple Listing Service (MLS) will continue to be supported through Realtor dues and thereby imparting vital information to the consumer.

As we move forward into this brave new world of real estate, it will be different but ultimately I am confident that Consumers and Realtors will work together so that all parties may benefit.

Patrick McCarran is a local Realtor and Broker He can be contact by phone or text at (925) 899-5536, pmccarran@yahoo.com or www.CallPatrick.com. An independently owned and operated office. Equal Housing Opportunity.

2024-25 County Assessment Roll shows over $11 billion increase in property tax base

Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024

For total of $278.83 billion, Antioch has 5th greatest amount of 19 cities with about 6% of total

“…the highest to date in Contra Costa County’s history” – Gus Kramer, County Assessor

Antioch had 3rd highest increase in assessed value at almost 5% mainly due to new homes

By Office of the Contra Costa County Assessor

The “2024-2025” Assessor’s “Close of Roll Affidavit” was signed by Gus S. Kramer, Assessor, and subscribed and sworn to the County Clerk-Recorder’s Office, on June 28, 2024. The 2024-2025 Assessment Roll has been delivered to the County Auditor, as required by law.

Source: Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office

The increase to the local tax base for 2024-2025 is over $11.16 billion. This represents a 4.17% increase in assessed value and brings the total net local assessment roll to more than $278.83 billion. The 2024-2025 assessment roll is the highest to date in Contra Costa County’s history. Of that amount $233.28 billion was from within the 19 cities and the balance within the unincorporated areas of the county.

Cities with the largest increases in assessed value include Antioch, Oakley and Martinez with increases ranging from 4.99% and 5.21% to 6.09%, respectively. San Ramon, Concord and Walnut Creek saw the lowest assessed value increases ranging from 2.97% down to 1.45%. The assessment roll now consists of 380,681 parcels, an increase of 1,239 over the previous year.

2024-25 Contra Costa County Assessment Roll increases by city. Source: CCC Assessor’s Office

Of the 19 cities in the county San Ramon has the greatest Gross Assessed Value, which includes both secured and non-secured at $28.63 billion, followed by Walnut Creek at $27.13 billion, Concord with $23.64 billion, Richmond with $21.42 billion, Danville with $18.13 billion and Antioch with $16.72 billion in assessed value.

“I would like to acknowledge and commend the employees of the Assessor’s Office for their continued dedication and hard work which resulted in the completion and delivery of the 2024-2025 assessment roll,” Kramer wrote in his annual letter to the Board of Supervisors.

UPDATE: The County Assessor explained, the increase in the assessed value in Antioch is a combination of new home developments and the resale of older homes at higher prices. “This doesn’t mean taxes are going up,” Kramer stated.

His letter and the 2024-2025 Assessment Roll Reports can be found, here.

Historic Belshaw Mansion in Antioch’s Rivertown is for sale

Friday, June 14th, 2024
The historic Belshaw Mansion sits at the corner of E and W 7th Streets in Antioch’s downtown Rivertown District. Source: BelshawMansion.com

130-year-old home is a Bay Area prized jewel; former home of State Senator, State Assemblyman

Exclusive to the Herald

A view of the E Street side of the mansion.

The Belshaw Mansion, in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown District, built in 1894, is celebrating its 130th anniversary this year. Now, after being owned by the Costello family for the last 27 years, the stunning house, one of the most iconic homes in the city and one of the Bay Area’s finest treasures, is for sale.

There’s quite a history behind it. The mansion was originally built for and owned by State Senator Charles Belshaw and then Assemblyman Robert Easley and it has played host to numerous community events.

Located at 705 E Street on the corner of W. 7th Street, it is one of the Bay Area’s most historic homes.

What makes it so historic?

First, its age and then its size, which proudly boasts 4,492 square feet of living space on approximately a 10,000 square foot lot. In fact, years back, the Belshaw Mansion took up the entire city block.

A simple drive downtown, and you cannot miss its presence. It rises to the top, showcasing its Victorian classic and Tudor-design accents. And finally, its historic greatness. The Belshaw Mansion has hosted numerous civic gatherings and tours for residents and dignitaries from other parts of the country.

To learn more about this historical gem in the Bay Area, a few questions were asked of former Antioch Councilwoman Elizabeth Rimbault, a former president and managing director of the Antioch Historical Society and local real estate appraiser. She has written and had articles published about the Belshaw Mansion in the past.

Asked why she believes the Belshaw Mansion is so historic Rimbault replied, “The Belshaw Mansion is one of the earliest homes in Antioch. It was designed and crafted in grand style by some of the original settlers of Antioch. It was custom-built with great care and detail and has continued to shine with its unique beauty for many years. Even though it was built in the 1890s, many people today cannot believe just how magnificent this home truly is.”

Asked what makes it so unique that it is often referred to as a mansion, she shared, “Because of the size of the house, when you see it from the street, it is overwhelming as it is huge. It certainly catches your eye. It has various rooms and levels everywhere you turn. The moldings have an original look, and the hardwood floors are exceptional – they no longer make homes like this. The size of the dining room and foyer area is quite impressive, and it has been the location for many parties and gatherings. It originally had a dumbwaiter that went up to the second level — just one of many unique characteristics of this grand property.  

A view of the W. 7th Street side of the house.

Rimbault was also asked, considering all the new developments in southeast Antioch and other communities, what type of family or families might be interested in the Belshaw Mansion. She responded, “It is suitable for several different families. To start, someone who appreciates history and loves beautiful items from the past or someone who is looking for an oversized home with plenty of living space, high ceilings, and numerous rooms and bathrooms will love this home.

Also, in today’s world, as housing prices continue to soar, it’s an excellent selection for multi-generational living. I have been in the home when one family had it as separate units for various families and another family had it as a single-family home.  It has the flexibility to suit either scenario as it has numerous bedrooms, bathrooms, living rooms, kitchens, entrances, parking, and amenities.”

From her previously written articles about the Belshaw family, Rimbault was asked what she knew about Charles and his relatives and why they are so prominent in Antioch’s history. She said,The Belshaw family is one of the most well-known families in Antioch’s history. They had mercantile stores and were involved with the mines, railroad, wharf, and city water development. Charles Belshaw, for whom the house was built, was a prominent State Senator who represented the district at the Capitol.”

Asked for any additional thoughts and information about the Belshaw Mansion Antioch residents should know about and appreciate, Rimbault shared, Its early history is with people involved in and familiar with state politics, and having been used to entertain dignitaries and local people simply adds to the charm of this home. Originally, the Belshaw Mansion was enjoyed by political families, first the Belshaws and then the Easleys, which is very interesting.

For more information and regular updates about the Belshaw Mansion, visit the home’s website at www.thebelshawmansion.com.

Dave Costello, the owners’ son, and Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Luxury Brentwood home for sale

Friday, April 26th, 2024

Open House Saturday, April 27

Paid advertisement.

This large, beautiful home has 6 bedrooms, 2 bonus rooms, and 4.5 bathrooms. One highly sought-after feature here is an en-suite (in-law) bedroom on the first floor. The kids can grab some blankets, popcorn, and get nice and cozy in the darkly painted theater room to immerse themselves into an amazing and safe movie experience! While, at the same time, you can escape to your primary suite for a relaxing experience as you soak in the large, jetted tub followed by a movie of your choice in your bedroom-sized retreat.

You will note the class and pride of ownership with upgraded cherry-wood kitchen and bathroom cabinets, 18 square marble tile foyer and kitchen floors, bordered by exquisite Venetian Mosaics, as well as the overall meticulous maintenance. The fireplace can be used by your choice of wood or gas. There are other great features like a water softener (owned), dual zone HVAC serviced annually by Champion, a finished/painted 3-car garage, a sink and cabinets the laundry room, and more! Nestled in the well-maintained Sterling Gate community, this beauty is very near walking trails, shopping, restaurants, and is in the Heritage High School district. 

Very quiet inside!

See more photos and details by clicking here.

(Advertise your home for sale on the Herald websites.

Antioch Council again adopts tenant anti-retaliation, harassment ordinance, spends $1.2 million for charging stations

Wednesday, August 23rd, 2023
Electric vehicle charging station examples. Source: City of Antioch

Approves contract for homeless encampment cleanup

“Gentrification only happens when filthy rich people push out people who rent,” Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker

By Allen D. Payton

During their Tuesday, August 22, 2023 meeting, for the third time, the Antioch City Council, on a 3-1-1 vote, approved the residential tenant anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance and unanimously voted to approve spending $1.2 million more for electric vehicle charging stations throughout the city for use by both the City vehicle fleet and the public. The council also voted to give a one-year extension to the multi-family housing project on Wild Horse Road and approved the contract for Homeless Encampment Cleanup.

Council Again Adopts Residential Tenant Anti-Retaliation, Harassment Ordinance

After approving it twice previously, the council again approved the anti-retaliation, harassment ordinance on a 3-1 vote with District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock voting no and District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica abstaining because he owns a property management company. The council had previously adopted the measure, but with District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson absent for the second reading, it passed on a 2-1 vote with changes. That required the item be brought back a second time for a first reading. (See related articles here and here)

“This legislation…is not the exact one we voted on weeks ago,” Thorpe stated. “No one is going to jail under this legislation. There is no provision for jail time. It doesn’t exist. There is no presumption of guilt in this legislation. Absolutely not. We have fixed that, and I think most parties are happy with that.”

“This is about the landlord’s intent if it’s in bad faith and it is, by the way, on the tenant to prove,” he added.

During another session of public comments – limited to just one minute each – on both sides of the matter, Mayor Lamar Thorpe warned members of the audience that the council meeting would end at 11 p.m. and if the council did not vote by then the item would be continued until the second meeting in September due to notification requirements for public hearings.

“Gentrification only happens when filthy rich people push out people who rent,” Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker said during council discussion.

“As I’ve said before, I agree with the ordinance but there needs to be some changes,” Ogorchock said referring to a section on single-family residences. “There was something that was talked about seniors. The seniors are safe. We added that in here. Health facilities…are in, here. They’re safe.”

She asked for a few changes.

“We can remove that language and add ‘as determined by the court’ because the court can imprison you,” Thorpe said with a laugh. He asked about language in the ordinance regarding landlords towing tenant vehicles being considered harassment.

“If you remove it in bad faith, I get that,” he said. “You are the second lawyer. The first lawyer told us something different. A landlord has a right to say, ‘this car is in violation…and I have to get it towed’. It can’t be harassment.”

“All this section is saying if you remove the vehicle…if you’re not supposed to tow the car but you do it anyway, you’re in violation of the law,” City Attorney Thomas L. Smith responded. “So, why don’t we add something to that to give you some clarification.”

“If you have a parking stall, your lease requires your vehicle to be registered…to be on the property,” Torres-Walker said. “If it’s not registered then they will tow your car. When you have a single-family home…you’re also renting the driveway. So, if my car is in the driveway how can you tow it?”

“Antioch steals cars every day,” she continued. “My car almost got towed. Is that harassment?”

“What this is saying is describing something that constitutes harassment,” Smith interjected and offered additional language. “If applicable law allows for towing the vehicle, then it’s not harassment.”

“That’s all we’re looking for,” Thorpe responded. “So, we will add that.”

“I had 10 other changes,” he continued to laughter by Torres-Walker. “I’m lying. I had a few other changes.”

“This doesn’t give ACCE or any organization to just walk onto a property,” Thorpe said about another section.

“This is more complicated,” Smith responded. “What we’re saying is the landlord shall allow the to enter and organize.”

“I just want to be clear that ACCE, if they have not been invited by a resident, they have a right to go onto an apartment complex and start organizing residents,” Thorpe shared. “This will be the last thing for me.”

“This is an important one,” Smith stated. “Here it says, ‘you won’t prohibit a tenant from organizing activities…or other political activities.’ It is a question of access. This is saying, you have to allow access, but you can provide the time and location. A right to access is a property right. But there is a question there of what is the government intent? Are we granting an accesss right?  We should clarify tenants can invite you but we aren’t requiring they allow.

“Do we have to take a vote to extend the meeting,” Torres-Walker then asked.

“Yes,” Smith responded.

The council then passed a motion to extend the meeting by seven minutes on a 4-0 vote.

“Why don’t we say when hosted by a tenant?” Smith asked.

“Perfect language,” Thorpe responded who then made the motion to adopt the ordinance with the revised language.

But more wordsmithing continued to clarify the changes requested by Ogorchock and Thorpe.

Thorpe then said about the section on protecting senior residential homecare facilities, “I supported that change because I thought my colleague would support the ordinance. So, we’re striking that language.”

“That is my motion,” he stated.

The council then voted 3-1 to cheers from the audience, with Ogorchock voting against and Barbanica recusing himself. Audience members left the council chambers chanting, “this is what democracy looks like.”

Council Approves $1.2M More for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

The council voted 5-0 to adopt a resolution approving an amendment to the Fiscal Year 2023/24 Operating Budget to increase the funding from the General Fund for the Zero Emission Vehicle Transition Project by $1,226,760 for a total amount of $1,361,814.

According to the staff presentation during the meeting, the state now requires 50% of all new cars purchased by local governments to be fully electric. If local governments are going to purchase two new vehicles, one of them has to be battery electric or fuel cell electric by state mandate, Thomas Paddon explained. “The City must act beginning next year.”

The charging stations will be available to both City vehicles and the public.

“It’s a good idea. But if 20 people have those kind of cars, then it’s not wise. I can’t afford it,” said resident Julia Emegokwae. “Elon Musk and the electric car companies should pay, not the City, not the taxpayers.”

“We’re just catering to two companies, Ford and Chevy. I just went and looked at Kias. Kia has EV cars,” another speaker said. “Other companies have EV cars and crossovers. So, I don’t know why they just want to stay on Chevy and Ford. When it’s time to buy that battery…it’s expensive every five years.”

Council Discussion & Vote

District 3 Councilman Mike Barbanica said, “you mentioned buy one regular car and buy one electric.”

“It’s a 50% procurement requirement. This is coming from CARB (California Air Resources Board,” Paddon said during the presentation. “It’s going to be an ongoing thing. All of your purchases cumulatively over the next 15 years have to be electric. Then it’s 100% after 2027. This is specifically for municipal fleets. This only applies to vehicles to heavy vehicles.”

This doesn’t apply to police Interceptors.

“If we’re only looking at F-250’s and above how many vehicles are we looking at?” Barbanica asked.

“66,” Paddon responded. “The electric vehicles will be more affordable, anyway. There are vehicles like Kia that we recommend in the light duty space.”

“The funds will come from CDC grant. It will be 25 percent cost share the city will have to come up,” he stated in response to a question by Barbanica.

“This $1.3 million is 25% of taxpayer money,” Barbanica stated.

“This is like a down payment on the infrastructure to power the entire fleet,” Paddon responded.

“The money is recommended coming out of the General Fund,” Acting Public Works Director Scott Buenting added.

“We always want to make sure we budget the money in a responsible way. So, we have to front the money. Whether we have the money or not we have to move in this direction,” Mayor Lamar Thorpe stated.

The motion to approve the additional funds for the program passed 5-0.

Gives Extension to Multi-Family Project, Approves Homeless Encampment Cleanup Contract

After passing a motion to adjourn, the council voted to reopen the meeting 4-1 with Barbanica voting against. They then passed a motion adopting the Consent Calendar except Items H and O.

On a separate vote on Item H, regarding a one-year extension of the vesting tentative map for the multi-family housing project on Wild Horse Road, Thorpe recused himself, again because his home is too close to the project.

“The motion to go union, since it’s a private project, the city doesn’t have any power to force a private landowner to go union,” Attorney Smith explained in response to a question by Barbanica.

“This was supposed to be commercial on the front of this site,” Ogorchock explained.

“All they’re asking for, here, city attorney, is an extension?” Barbanica asked.

The motion then passed 4-0-1.

The council then approved Item O awarding a Maintenance Services Agreement for On-Call Homeless Encampment Cleanup Services throughout the City to Sharjo LLC dba ServiceMaster Restoration Management for a three (3) year term from July 25, 2023, to June 30, 2026, in the amount of $1,365,000 with an option to extend two (2) additional years from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2028, in an amount of $951,360 for a total contract amount not to exceed $2,316,360 over the five (5) year period.

The council had previously approved the budget item during their July 25th meeting on a split vote of 4-0-1 with Torres-Walker voting to abstain.

“I do agree we need to support our city workers,” she stated. “We should have worked with Safe Streets that could help homeless folks. We could have spent this million and some change in a better way…a way that is a lot more sustainable that could have got people off the streets.”

The motion to approve passed 4-1 with the mayor pro tem voting against.

The council then voted again to adjourn the meeting at 11:20 p.m.

Because the discussion and vote on the anti-retaliation and harassment ordinance item ran past 11 p.m., the council continued the remaining item regarding discussion of potentially hiring retired police officers to help the department until their next meeting.

Property Tax Reduction Scam Alert: important warning from Contra Costa County Assessor Gus Kramer

Friday, July 28th, 2023

Don’t pay a fee to have your property taxes reduced

(Martinez, CA) – Many property owners throughout Contra Costa County are receiving an official looking document in the mail regarding a fee-based service to have their property’s taxable value reduced. Although these mailers have the appearance of an official government document, the correspondence is not from the Contra Costa County Assessor or any other Contra Costa County Office. 

The California Attorney General’s Office has posted warnings to California property owners on their website about the practices of these companies. For more information, please visit the Attorney General’s Consumer Alert at https://oag.ca.gov/consumers/general/prop_tax_scam.

Current scam mailers are requiring both a $40 county filing fee with the Clerk of the Assessment Appeals Board for a formal appeal, and a contingent fee of 30% of any tax savings as a result of filing the application. 

It is important for property owners to know that the Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office does not charge a fee to complete an informal value review for our taxpayers.

Property owners who believe the current market value of their property is less than the assessed value, can file a FREE “Request for Value Review (Prop 8)” form with the Contra Costa County Assessor’s Office. Please visit our webpage at http://www.cccounty.us/assessor and select “Review Your Value” to find a downloadable application.

Antioch Council adopts tenant anti-retaliation, harassment ordinance on split vote

Tuesday, July 25th, 2023

Including two amendments by Thorpe, one by Ogorchock but she vote no

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting Tuesday, July 25, 2023, the Antioch City Council adopted an ordinance prohibiting retaliation and harassment against residential tenants on a 3-1 vote. District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica who is a real estate broker and owns a property management company said, “upon advice of the city attorney I’m going to recuse myself from this item.” District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock was the lone vote against the ordinance.

The ordinance is in response to requests by multiple residents at previous council meetings beginning last year.

Mayor Lamar Thorpe temporarily handed the gavel to Mayor Pro Tem Tamisha Torres-Walker to run the meeting. While he limited public comments to 90 seconds on other items, he said he couldn’t do that for this item as it was a public hearing which allows for five minutes per public speaker.

According to the City staff report regarding the associated costs, “adoption of the ordinance will have direct and indirect fiscal impacts if the City engages in enforcement of the ordinance, either through the code enforcement process or through litigation. The proposed Ordinance may be enforced by an aggrieved tenant, an organization or other entity that represents the interests of aggrieved tenants, or the City.

At a minimum, an assistant city attorney or deputy city attorney position plus administrative support would be necessary for the City Attorney’s Office to provide support services to the public for this ordinance.”

According to an attorney who spoke as the proponent, the ordinance includes three things.

“It needs a reasonable standard for the violation. This ordinance includes things that are unique to Antioch including towing cars. Finally, it has a third element, remedies that can be used when the landlord violates the ordinance. They include attorney’s fees so tenants don’t have to pay out of pocket.”

“Here, there are aspects to the landlord. Any violation has to be done in bad faith,” he continued. “Bad faith conduct is the base line.”

“If it’s frivolous the landlord can collect attorney’s fees from the tenant,” the attorney added.

“You’re going to hear it’s unnecessary, it’s duplicative and doesn’t do anything,” he stated.

“There’s a talking point that tenants just need to be educated and I find that offensive,” the attorney continued. “The tenants know their rights. These tenants know the law and they know their living conditions. Thank you for putting on a great ordinance, tonight.”

The opponent was a representative of the California Apartment Association, that represents property owners in Antioch and Contra Costa County.

“It does fail to recognize some existing anti-harassment that are codified in state law,” she said. “We are redefining harassment and creating landmines.”

Speaking of one portion of the ordinance she stated, “there is a presumption of guilt. This provision blurs the burden of proof. It’s contradictory.”

One section she claimed was a backdoor to rent control as it allows for the claim any rent increase could be considered harassment.

“We ask you to reject this…and move forward with an inclusionary process,” she concluded.

Public Comments

During public comments several landlords spoke against the proposed ordinance in its current form and asked for changes before the council adopted it.

The first speaker was Joe Stokely, Sr., a rental property owner in Antioch. “I stand here before you confused and irritated. What is being proposed will produce a complete opposite affect than what the council is trying to accomplish. Why would anyone want to invest and want to continue owning rental property in the city facing a hostile environment.“You presume…all landlords are bad.”

“Please don’t make me have to go through the process at my age of selling my properties and invest elsewhere,” he concluded.

Another speaker, Ranae Callaway, branch manager of a mortgage company and representing the Delta Association of Realtors. She pointed out the “severe fines against landlords” included in the ordinance. “The ordinance does not provide a clear definition of bad faith or who will define it.”

Another speaker named James, said “My family has lived here for 100 years. For over 60 years we have provided below-market rate rentals in District 1. During those 60 years we’ve had four evictions.”

He asked for a progressive ordinance that respects both landlords and tenants. Let’s take the opportunity to collaborate…to develop an ordinance that works for everyone.”

Aeysha Corio, a Realtor, landlord and a City of Concord Planning Commissioner, spoke next saying, “I went over this ordinance. I do believe there needs to be protections for tenants. But it is incredibly unbalanced.”

“You got to find another way to deal with people who are violating people’s rights,” she continued and said, “I feel like this polarization of tenant vs. landlord needs to go. We should be working together.”

Antioch landlord and Realtor, Scott MacIntyre spoke next saying, “We already have laws in California. I myself am a very ethical housing provider. I follow the law and expect the city to follow the law, too. There are 14,000 homes in Antioch that are rentals. Don’t lump us in with a few very bad landlords.”

“It’s very ambiguous…very broad interpretation. I agree with it. Just want to see it tightened up,” he added.

Millie Phillips, a faith organizer that does tenants’ rights work in Contra Costa County, thanked the council “for an ordinance we can support.”

“They’re not saying every landlord is the same. They’ve talked about very specific landlords,” she stated. “All over the state there are laws that protect tenants that are working and are not affecting people who are not harassing. So, I don’t see the issue. Don’t do that kind of behavior and this ordinance will never apply to you. This is directed at the bad actors.”

Joe Stokley, Jr., of Stokley Properties with over 100 rentals in Antioch said if the council passes the ordinance, he would sell his properties and invest elsewhere.

Almost all of the remaining speakers were tenants in favor of the ordinance, including several members of Rising Juntos (formerly known as East County Regional Group) and Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) Action.

“You should take this up with corporate landlords who are making you look bad,” said another speaker to the landlords in attendance.

Speakers also asked for the council to adopt a Just Cause Eviction ordinance in September.

Council Discussion and Decision

During council discussion of the item Ogorchock spoke first saying, “My heart goes out to some of you who have to live in these conditions. But with this ordinance I do have some questions.”

She spoke of the difference between corporate ownership of rental property versus single-family homes.

“Bad faith needs to be defined because it’s in here, a lot,” she stated.

Ogorchock also spoke of part of the ordinance applying to single family homes and people who rent out rooms.

“Under presumption of guilt there’s no due process,” she continued.

“I don’t see in here anything about senior home care facilities,” Ogorchock stated.

“There is a lot of good, in here. But these are some of the things I’m pointing out,” she said.

“I also wrote in here, Measure O. Did we list any of these people paying under Measure O, did we advise them of these meetings?” Ogorchock asked.

She said the burden of proof shouldn’t all be on the owners and the fines in the ordinance were excessive.

“The complaints are mainly about the corporate owners,” Ogorchock explained. “Maybe we should be looking at changing some of the language in here, so it applies to corporate owners.”

She asked “for an ordinance that we can all live with.”

Torres-Walker said, “this is a hard decision to deal with. We have been dealing with this for three years. Mayor Thorpe attempted to have a meeting with landlords, non-profits. For some reason we couldn’t come to agreement at that point.”

“Not all landlords are slumlords,” she continued. “I’m one mortgage payment away from losing my house.”

“I feel like landlords abandoning their business in Antioch over public policy is trying to censor renters,” Torres-Walker continued. “I would hope those that do would work with first-time homebuyers.”

She then made a motion to approve the ordinance waiving the second reading with District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson seconding the motion.

Before the vote Thorpe asked questions about the sections of the ordinance

“I’m going to rent my guest room to a friend for six months. Does this mean I have to rent the room to someone else?” he asked.

“It’s providing a right to a renter to sublet to another,” City Attorney Thomas L. Smith said.

“What this is saying if I rent my home to a family, they can go sublet, even if I say they can’t do that?” Thorpe asked.

“A right to one-to-one replacement of a tenant. If you are a renter in a place and you have a roommate in a place, you would have the right to replace that roommate…with another person,” Smith responded.

“My concern is if I’m renting my house and I’m renting it to a family, and I say I just want this family…they have that right to rent out a guest room without my permission?” the mayor asked.

“It’s not that simple. You have a contract,” Smith explained. “It’s your contract that governs. But I will say with this provision your concern is who has that right. It is a fair concern to have.”

“I don’t think that’s right and the first thing I’m going to say is this is going to be a friendly amendment to change that provision,” Thorpe stated.

“Some of the landlords are concerned about subletting would automatically find the landlord out of compliance,” he then said.

“The housing services part was a concern if the definition allowed for unlimited subletting. If your amendment goes through it would be a moot point,” the representative for the California Apartments Association responded.

“The issue that was trying to be prevented, here is the landlord rents out to four people and two move out and the landlord requires the remaining tenants to pay the entire rent,” said the other attorney. “Generally, it’s one lease per rental unit. In a house you’ll have several tenants on one lease. This is not making landlord rent their guest rooms. This means one leaving one coming in.”

“The one-to-one thing, I’m still going to stick with my amendment,” Thorpe said.

“Oh, refuse to accept or acknowledge tenant’s payment. There were some valid points made here, today. We’re not supposed to accept rent during the eviction process,” he stated.

“You could add some language clarifying when landlords are going through the eviction process,” Smith responded.

“That will be my second amendment,” the mayor shared.

Ogorchock then asked Thorpe to add senior home care into the exemptions, to which he agreed.

“They would qualify under…hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, so it would make sense,” he stated.

Torres-Walker asked, “why” and “they’re renters?”

“Yes,” Ogorchock responded and explained how homes have five or six tenants, plus caregivers and live-in nurses.

Smith suggested a substitute motion with the mayor’s amendments which Torres-Walker did, seconded by Wilson and it passed 3-1 with Ogorchock voting no.

Torres-Walker then thanked Barbanica for recusing himself from the process, “which was absolutely the right thing to do.”

The audience erupted in cheers as they left the Council Chambers.