At its July 5 meeting, the City Council voted to place the Utility Modernization Act on the November ballot. This measure maintains funding for critical city services. This is an important decision for the city of Alameda, so here are the answers to some key questions voters should consider.
Councilmember attempts to dispell misunderstanding of rent ordinance
As the City Council is poised next week to place the strong tenant protections we passed earlier this year on the ballot, I’d like to dispel a few myths about the Council’s ordinance.
The first myth: the City Council has done nothing to protect tenants. That’s simply not true. Last November, the Council enacted a moratorium on egregious rent increases and most evictions while we drafted a strong set of renter protections.
The ongoing cleanup at Alameda Point may have divided our community into three camps. Camp 1 consists of those racing to develop and build out the Point because cleanup is done and “will not cause serious public health problems.”
Camp 2 consists of those who attend regular cleanup meetings and know that cleanup will continue for several more years.
Camp 3 — a majority — consists of those who never know quite what to believe since information is contradictory and confusing.
Discussion of ordinance continues with rebuttal to commentary last week
Paul Foreman’s commentary last week on my July 14 letter about the fixed-term lease loophole (“’Loophole’ a Clear Policy Decision, July 21) is emblematic of a widespread insensitivity to the vulnerability of renters.
This is in response to Monty Heyings’s commentary (”Vote Cements Loophole for Alameda Landlords,” July 14) concerning the fixed-term lease “loophole” in the city’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance. I am neither a residential landlord nor a tenant.
Heying presents this issue as an error that Council is too lazy to fix. On the contrary, it was a clear policy decision that took up an hour of discussion beyond the midnight hour at the Feb. 16 Council meeting.