The Merced City Council on Monday night largely opposed a requested agenda item to discuss expanding tenant protections after hearing broad opposition from community members.
District 6 Councilmember Fue Xiong spearheaded a discussion to consider adding an action item to a future agenda. Xiong presented four programs as additional safeguards for renters in Merced: a rental registry program, pro-active code enforcement and inspection program, a rent stabilization ordinance and a tenants’ right to legal representation program.
More than a dozen landlords, property managers, homeowners and housing advocates spoke during public comment. The item received dozens of written public comments online.
The majority urged the city council to reconsider moving forward with an action item based on Xiong’s presentation.
Xiong’s motion to put the item on a future agenda failed to move forward because no other council member cast a second vote to support it.
“I guess with that, I’m going to motion to direct staff to move forward in researching ways to expand tenant protections, and I will let the rest of the council decide,” Xiong said.
Any proposal for expanded renter protections needs to consider “small mom and pop” business owners who invested time and money into the community, District 2 Councilmember Yang Pao Thao said before declining Xiong’s motion.
The council approved two ordinances protecting renters earlier this year.
One of them, the repeat housing code violators program, passed in June with a unanimous vote. It targets landlords who accumulate three housing violations within a year and directs code enforcement officers to cite repeat violators with a $1,000 daily fine for uncorrected code violations.
The ordinance was widely celebrated by tenants’ rights advocates, council members and property managers.
With a 6-1 vote Monday night, the council also finalized a resolution establishing inspection procedures for multi-unit substandard buildings.
Monday’s vote on the procedures came after multiple discussions by the council, and after City Attorney Craig J. Cornwell received a letter in March from the state attorney general’s office warning the city’s inspection policies for substandard multi-unit buildings were out of compliance with state law.
The policies Xiong hoped to discuss Monday night would have added further protections for tenants, but his council colleagues said they wanted to wait and see how the repeat housing code violators program ordinance, commonly referred to as the anti-slumlord ordinance, unfolds.
“You didn’t even let the ink dry on the ordinance after it was printed,” District 1 Councilmember Darin DuPont told Xiong.
Thao agreed, saying “I don’t think this is the right time for us to adopt anything.”
The public weighs in
The council heard multiple testimonies from property managers and owners during public comment. Many opposed the item and raised concerns about unintended consequences for well-meaning landlords.
“These policies may sound compassionate, but they have consequences,” said Erin Hamm, a property manager and school board trustee.
Hamm supported the council’s anti-slumlord ordinance, but on Monday she spoke against Xiong’s proposal.
Mike Sulaver, a property owner, suggested council members instead draft a pilot program to collect data.
“Staff should be directed to analyze the actual data from these increased inspections and report results,” Sulaver said.
Police Chief Steven Stanfield reported an increased number of calls to the department’s code enforcement division during the council’s discussion on inspection procedures for substandard multi-unit buildings. The number of calls to file a complaint reporting substandard housing was unclear, he said.
“This proposal was a wish list,” John Bliss, a property owner, said. “Someone needs to say what it actually costs, and what it can and cannot do.”
Bliss is running against Xiong, along with fellow challenger and businessman Yader Zeledon, in November for the District 6 seat.
Paul Vose, a retired property owner, asked the council not to move forward with the agenda item and to consider small landlords.
He leases units at below-market rates, and is paying approximately $25,000 in mold-related expenses, he said.
That experience, Vose said, cost him more than he was charging for rent in one year and resulted in a court case.
“We’re a small landlord. We’re retired,” Vose said. “This is our hedge against inflation.”
On the other hand, tenants’ rights and affordable housing advocates favored the policies.
Renter LaTanya Ri’Chard spoke in support of stronger tenant protections and raised concerns about the high cost of living.
“It is not the tenant’s job to keep you afloat financially,” Ri’Chard said, speaking to the audience and council members.
Blanca Ojeda, a housing advocate with Faith in the Valley, also spoke in support of Xiong’s presentation.
“If you’re doing the right thing…accountability should not be something you fear,” Ojeda said, referring to landlords.
“This is not us versus them,” she added. “This is about safe housing versus unsafe housing.”
Council rejects further review
Council members rejected Xiong’s proposed action, calling it government overreach and citing state laws already protecting tenants.
They also said they needed more data before considering such a proposal in the future.
District 5 Council Member Sarah Boyle asked a number of questions.
“Before I consider expanding beyond the program we just adopted, I want to see the results,” she said, “How many properties are being designated as repeat violators? Are the increased penalties resulting in faster compliance? How many tenants are actually being displaced? What problems are we discovering that our new ordinance cannot address?”
Boyle represents the district where Merced Gardens Apartments, an affordable housing complex in north Merced is located. The Southern California-based owner lost federal funding last year after being cited for housing code violations.
DuPont called Xiong’s presentation a “slap in the face” to Councilmember Shane Smith, who was instrumental in drafting the anti-slumlord ordinance.
It overlooked Smith’s time and effort to “broker a deal” between housing advocates, property managers and landlords, DuPont said.
District 3 Councilmember Mike Harris said the one thing he does support is more code enforcement officers. “It’s clear that they’re overworked now,” he said.
Currently, Merced’s code enforcement program is staffed by four officers who investigate complaints at properties citywide. Those properties include residential housing, vacant lots, blighted buildings and all other properties posing a health and safety concern within city limits.
“My thanks and admiration to the landlords, property managers, who do it right,” Harris said. “I tried to be a landlord twice, and I ended up in court both times, losing money, and I swore never again.”
After the council meeting ended, property manager Bill Baker told The Merced FOCUS that not all landlords are rich. Many are average adults seeking retirement.
“Real estate is the last frontier,” Baker said.
Ashley Marie Suarez, a policy advocate with Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, spoke during public comment on council’s discussion of both the multi-unit building inspection resolution and Xiong’s presentation.
Suarez regularly attends the city council meetings to advocate on behalf of vulnerable renters. She often meets with Spanish-speakers who need help understanding housing policy.
“I think the really important thing to remember is that this work is a group effort,” she told the FOCUS. “Local government, city council, is just another team effort. It’s a big group project, and the project is to make the city of Merced the best that it can be – to grow, to make everybody have equal opportunity.”
