Comments

1
They let this happen for too long. Get them our of office now!
2
Cue my eviction notice in three...two...
3
So what your saying is that I should get my heart rate nice and high when I check my mail for the next month.

ANXIETY.
4
What real difference does it make if tenants get a 90 day notice of an exorbatant rent-hike? They still have no where to go. We need real change. This is just political manuvering.
5
How generous! Sorry, our hands are tied, we can't do anything about working class people being pushed out of their neighborhoods, but we'll give you a little more notice before it happens. If folks want to prevent this from continuing, they should start organizing eviction refusals with neighbors, friends, and family in order to create a physical impediment to parasitic landlords. Don't go without making them take you, kicking and screaming.
6
@Robin - Or you could just buy a house.
7
Oh boy. Buckle up.
8
I fail to understand why landlords should be required to give more notice than tenants when wanting to end a contract. If we are going to say that for a month to month rental 3 months notice is required then that should go both ways.
9
On a related note I have purchased every van for sale on Craigslist and am selling them for twice what I paid for them. So if you think you were going to buy an inexpensive vehicle to sleep in after you eventually can't find a place to live I have some bad news for you.
10
Ending no-cause evictions is sticky. We need to protect renters, but tying owners' hands isn't quite the right approach.
11
It's no more legal to place a "temporary ban on no-cause evictions" than it is to place a temporary ban on Californians.
12
The reason that there should be different requirements for landlords and tenants is this -- when a tenant gives 30-day notice the landlord is left with their property, their equity, and the ability to rent it to a new tenant and in this climate that should be a cinch. When a landlord gives a no cause termination or steep rent increase it thrusts many tenants into an instant crisis on multiple levels that may effect their job, their schooling (or their children's), their community connections and safety net, and their financial stability. It may even cause them to become homeless. I don't know why this is so hard for some people to grasp. We are not talking about bad tenants who are a nuisance, danger, or are not paying their rent -- we're talking about tenants who are doing everything right and are given no cause terminations or exorbitant rent increases.

Housing is a basic need and a human right. If you've decided to get into the rental racket then you need to come to terms with the fact that you have greater responsibility to your "customers" than the average business person. Please come up with a better rationale for why landlords whose tenants are paying their mortgage and allowing them to build equity in an investment property should have no restrictions on terminations and rent increase than "because capitalism." If you don't like the changes that are coming your way then sell your property.

This is a tiny step in the right direction but not nearly enough. All the city will accomplish is staving off the inevitable hardship for another 30-60 days for renters who earn below MFI.
13
While this is certainly an issue that needs to be considered, the fact that you couldn't sell a house in Portland 5 years ago makes me wonder if this is yet another boom and bust cycle that will eventually work itself out.
14
@chuck: That's cold comfort to the 50% of renters who now spend over 30% of their income on rent.
15
@chuck: That's cold comfort to the 50% of renters who now spend over 30% of their income on rent (half of whom are spending over 50%).
16
@reymont: That joke isn't funny anymore.
17
@chloe I'm sure it's not, but I wouldn't bank on much comfort coming from City Council either.
18
If the City won't or "can't" ban no-cause evictions in the short term, then tenants and their communities are going to have to. We need a union that's prepared to do that kind of work. Don't like it? On the side of landlords (whether you are one or aspire to be one or just like licking their boots)? Please show up to a picket.
19
"We're encouraged by Commissioner Saltzman's immediate response to the Renters State of Emergency and think its' a step in the right direction," Buri says. "We want to support the protections, but looking forward I'm planning to speak with my Board and CAT leaders to make sure this provides adequate protections to tenants."

Justin, I'll save you the conversation with your Board and CAT leaders: As a renter, and someone who has talked about this issue with thousands of other renters in several different mediums, and as someone who has experienced the trauma of no-cause terminations (twice!) and exorbitant rent increases, I can tell you with 100% certainty that this DEFINITELY DOES NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS TO TENANTS.

It is hitting the snooze button. That's it. Extra time does little to ease the financial and emotional burden of involuntary displacement, especially when that extra time traps renters into a longer holding pattern of paying double rent should they procure replacement housing sooner. If we "accept" 90 days, it needs to come with measures completely ameliorate the cost burden of displacement, at the very least.

Do. Not. Settle. For. Less.

And econoline: I'm on board with your suggestion of a symmetric business relationship. I would like to request a security deposit from my landlord equal to one-year of rent should I need to hire an attorney to defend any violations of my rights on your part. I would also love a cut of the equity you're building while I'm paying your mortgage. And since you can tell me what color my walls need to be and how many nail holes I'm allowed to put in the walls, and whether or not I can keep my beloved animals (and how much extra you're charge me for that privilege), I would like to come to your house and tell you how to live. And when I'm ready to be done with you as my landlord, I'll send you a notice (90 days of course!) and you can find a new house to lord over.
20
I applaud Saltzman.

Margot, you make some good points to begin with, but then jump the shark in your last paragraph.
21
So Saltzman is just as dumb and spineless as he looks. Notice hales in the background making sure everyone hears that he supports it.

Why is this breaking news?
22
Guys, I understand your anger at the rents, but landlords usually operate on very low margins if they're even profitable. Small time landlords take a huge risk, because a bad tenant can do thousands of dollars of damage and refuse to pay the rent for months while you rack up legal bills trying to evict them. Most properties appreciate about 2% a year but values drop too. Rising rents of late only marginally improves the picture for your average landlord. These time limits are fine but tenants can't expect rent to stay the same regardless of prevailing economic forces.

If you are month to month, you have no right to be upset about changing terms. If you want stability you get a long term lease. Why not ask for future rent increases to be set out in your contract? People worried about rising rents should really think about buying a house. It's the age-old way of securing housing stability.

Otherwise, appreciate the fact that you get to have your shelter without borrowing hundreds of thousands of dollars or worrying about leaks and termites and unexpected maintenance costs etc. Recognize that your home is provided to you by someone who went to a lot of trouble to buy and maintain the place, and took a big risk, and continues to bear risk in renting it to you, and any profit they manage to take home is probably well deserved.
23
My last 30-day notice from a tenant left me with $9,000 damage to a unit which could not even be shown because it was such a disaster. This unit was in beautiful shape prior to their occupancy. Unfortunately, I did not require the equivalent of a months rent as a deposit when they moved in because they wanted it for "a short-term" situation and were in need of a place right away. My mistake. Never again will I not charge a significant deposit. Even if I had charged a full month's rent as a deposit, I STILL would have lost a lot on this situation. Moreover, with the need to hire people to repair the damage they caused, I had to run up my credit cards and was being charged late fees myself ...and had to apply and obtain a loan to get the money to finance the repairs and this without the rental income during the time of repairs. Rental income supplements my pension income. Landlords take risks when they rent out their property. I have no problem with giving 2 months notice...to tenants of any rent increase but a year?!! Evictions are usually absolutely last resort to get rid of terrible tenants and they are not cost-free. Usually, the eviction is due to the tenant not paying rent, endangering other tenants, engaging in illegal activities or damaging the apartment or more than one of these reasons. A "no-fault eviction" must be when the tenant's lease agreement runs out and the landlord decides not to renew it. That decision not to renew is often because of the same reasons of a "for cause
eviction" but because of the lease agreement or a month to month only rental agreement, the landlord can simply give notice and not have to go to court to explain about illegal drug trafficking, or other objectionable or damaging activities on the part of the tenant or because the landlord wants to make major improvements in the property which require a vacancy or because a family member wants to move in instead....

.If a year's notice is required to raise rent more than 5%, I suppose that notice of POSSIBLE specific amount of rent increase in one year will likely would simply become part of the lease agreement of a new tenant so its built in.
24
Oh, wanted to add that the main photo with the kids and the cardboard signs - Hate It.
I abhor people using children who have no idea what the are doing as political showpieces.
The parents should be ashamed, as well as you guys using the pic.
25
Many interesting points, on both sides of the equation, which is rare. Thanks fixedincome and mikenathan for adding in an often unheard (in these comment sections that is) perspective to the debate.
26
It sounds like we're pretty far apart. 90 day isn't a lot, but I'm wary of what "complete amelioration" means.

More conversation is needed.
27
@ Reymont and others who suggest to renters to 'just buy a house'...
if I COULD buy a house I would…
As a low income self employed individual with absolutely no savings, it isn't happening - at least not for 2 more years from when I have a steady income that is $1000 more than what I currently make…so said the Mortgage broker I recently met with.
Please stop suggesting to just buy a house - speaking for my self ( and probably a few other) I WOULD IF I COULD!!!!!
28
I agree the "just buy a house" comments are ridiculous. But, to people who want to buy a house on a limited budget, make sure you explore all the first time homebuyer options and programs like fha loans etc. And, think outside the box on locations. There is going to be some real appreciation over the next 10 - 30 years in areas that are currently deemed a little "too far out" by the "cool" crowd.
29
A human right is by definition everyone's right. Rent control doesn't increase the amount of housing, it doesn't increase the number of people who have access to what is supposedly a right. It just takes that right from some people and gives it to others.

Divorced from efforts to increase housing supply, rent control doesn't create a human right. It just creates a privilege.
30
I intend to go back to Portland when all this settles down.
There will be a great fall and it will go back to how it used to be and I can move back to my awesome hometown.
For now, I am watching from a far in Astoria.

BTW.. stay the fuck away from Astoria!
31
Nobody is talking about the real problem, the difference in real estate inflation vs. pay inflation. My dad moved to Portland in the 60's and bought a huge inner city house for under 20k. That was close to a years salary fresh out of college at his awesome job that makes a difference. Now the house is worth over a million. Nobodies salary has inflated anywhere near that much. This is the issue we need to fix and I have no idea what's the most effective approach. Anyone?

My family has been able to afford this house and their quality of life by working super hard, being frugal and also having housemates my entire life. (And never turning on the heat in the winter!) If 10% of homeowners took in a single housemate we could probably curb the housing crisis right now. A good housemate keeps life interesting and creates community. Hopefully they also do their own dishes!

Meanwhile some of Oregon's best farms have been done in by the Urban Growth Boundary and continuing McMansion expansion at this rate is inevitable but suburbs and small towns in Oregon are just not as cool as Portlandia and most places within a few hours of Portland experience a cultural desert, where anyone doing anything of interest does it in Portland instead of at home.

The solution.... Move to the country folks! Take your food cart and your cottage industry and your garage band and all of your renter friends and go in on some land. Open a small business and give back to poor old small town rural Oregon that has given so much for so long. Portland is so rad because it was the perfect economy of scale. Small town Oregon has so much potential! Take your love where it's needed and let Portland be a seed you plant wherever you grow.
32
How many renters here voted for every tax increase, every PPS bond measure, every TriMet bond, that increases a property owners taxes?

Those are costs that a landlord can't plan for, they are at the mercy of the voters, many of whom are renters and don't think they will be impacted. Well guess what you just voted to increase your rent.
33
FRANKIEB: Indeed. I just hear the "it should go both ways" with regards to the lease and notice periods so much that I couldn't help myself. There is nothing symmetric about the relationship between landlord and tenant, just the name itsself, landLORD, belies the mastee/subject nature of it.

FIXEDINCOME:The tenants who damage properties are an issue, an issue I wish we didn't have to contend with I'm this quest to have stronger protections. I'd like to believe that a combination of both education and restoration of dignity (to the renter) would mitigate this somewhat. It is harder to care for something and take ownership and pride in your home when your home is symbolic of your lessor class in society and the relationship landlord tenant is demeaning and demoralizing.

But ultimately, some of this risk inherent in owning a rental should really be dealt with with an insurance policy, whether it's renters insurance or homeowners or both. While I am sincerely sympathetic to the financial impact of making $9000 in repairs, the flip side of this is that tenants aren't getting their (rather substantial) security deposits back for spurious reasons. Someone I just spoke with was charged $1200 for a carpet CLEANING. The carpet was 10 years old, she's lived there with kids and pets for 3, and the owner kicked her out to sell the place. So he no doubt replaced the carpet and billed her for it. Legally questionable, but now it's on her to take him to court to recover the funds. Many of the tenants I talk to feel like "well they are just going to keep the deposit no matter what, why bother [cleaning, fixing, replacing, etc.]". I've never left a place anything but spic and span and lost $3000 in my last two rentals to nickle & diming.

MIKENATHAN: People ARE asking for longer leases, or increases spelled out in the lease. At present, given the market, many landlords aren't offering longer (or any) leases as an option. They are converting all tenants to month to month to have greater flexibility for rent increases and evictions.

I don't think many landlords in Portland are operating on a thin margin. Everytime I tell someone what my rent is they respond by telling me that that's double (or more) their mortgage. We're seeing property values go up by way over 2% a year, so their equity isn't in question either. And rents are going up by several hundred dollars a month (mine went up $250, I've heard of $400-500 rent increases too), so I'm just not feeling too compelled by the tales of thin profit margin. It sounds like you are an ethical and compassionate landlord, there are lots of LLs in this town who aren't making repairs and maintaining their properties, but are raising the rent anyway. If we ask for a repair or report a choose violation then we get a no cause eviction. Yes, that's illegal, but it happens all the time and how likely is it that a renter has the money to hire an attorney and go to court before the notice period expires? Even if they did, the cases are extremely hard to prove and win. CAT heeled with one case, where the landlord left a note saying (essentially) "can't afford the repair, here's your no-cause", and the court finally ruled in the tenants favor years later, after speaking all the way to the Supreme Court. This is why landlord shouldn't play judge and jury and executioner with no cause evictions. The protections supposedly in place aren't working.
34
@Carey - Yeah, buying a house is hard! But you don't get all the nice things that come with owning without doing the work and taking the risk.

If you want freedom and flexibility, rent whatever someone is willing to rent you. If you want stable costs and independence, do the work to buy a house!

Yes, that may require a career in a field that you don't like, or living in an area you don't like - but that's the 'hard work' part. All these people whining about renters rights want all the frosting without bothering to bake the cake. They want to live in the 'cool' neighborhoods for cheap, want to live in a nice place without risking their life's savings, and they think they have a "right" to all of those things. It's absolutely ridiculous.
35
@Margot - Oh, and there are already laws against charging $1,200 for carpet cleaning, and the other kind of shitbag landlord things you've listed. And there are groups that would love you help you enforce them! With huge penalties for landlords who try that kind of stupid stuff. None of the stuff you listed needs new laws - just enforce the ones we have.
36
@margot - they only talk about their mortgage, what about all the other costs of home ownership, like maintenance, water, electricity, garbage collection, insurance?

As for equity, it's nice but it means nothing until you sell the house or take the equity out in a loan along with all the inherent risks of taking a home equity loan.

Then there's tax, not only property tax, but income tax on the profit you do make.

And if you're just renting out a house or a couple of houses, many landlords pay management company to handle the property, again a cost to the landlord. Then again large complexes also have full time staff so they have that same expense.

So comparing your rent to someones mortgage is an unfair comparison because your rent includes a lot more than the mortgage.
37
I will say that I don't have any problems with the changes proposed in the article. There's no real impact to landlords in giving more notice, and if it helps ease some hardship on the tenants it's probably worth doing. It's just the crazy entitlement in some of the comments above that I was responding to, not the more reasonable changes in the article...
38
@REYMONT: Please tell me about all these resources available to help tenants enforce their rights and get their money back. I have thousands of renters who would appreciate this information. That these laws and regulations are extremely difficult and expensive (to the tenant) to enforce is a well-documented fact.

Reymont, your bootstraps narrative is frustrating on so many levels. There are so many reasons why buying a house is not the right choice for a person; it has nothing to do with hard work. Do you think that college students living off campus should be buying houses? What about senior citizens who don't have family and don't have the resources (physical or financial) to take care of a house? What about people living here only temporarily for short-term job assignments (visiting professors, doctors doing residencies, grad students, etc.)? What about the people who would love to buy a house but can't compete with cash offers, or can't save due to rent increases far outpacing earnings increases? Do all these people deserve to be treated like 2nd class citizens because they can't own a home? What is it about renting a home from the bank that makes someone so much more important and worthy than renting it from the landlord?

@VELMA: I pay water, electricity, and garbage collection. And I ALWAYS have. I live in a multifamily apartment complex with two water meters and pay an average of $120/mo (lowest month: $80) based on having 4 residents in my unit. I could be gone the whole month and still pay $120/mo. Ask me if I have a water efficient toilet, faucet, or shower head? Nope. How about that coin-operated top-loading washing machine in my building? I pay $1.75/load AND I pay for the water with my bill. (The entire bill is split between all the units, depending on the number of residents.) Legal? Yep. I am also required to pay renter's insurance.

I'm sure that that taxes/maintenance/insurance is all rolled into the calculus of determining the minimum rent that a unit can be rented for. No one is taking a loss on that in this market without some extenuating circumstances. Property taxes only go up by at most 3% per year, that doesn't explain my 15% rent increase. And landlords are unabashed in telling us that if we vote for tax levies they will pass those costs right on to us.
39
@Margot - Yeah, there are a lot of benefits to renting! You're right - you don't have to commit to living in that area for a long time, you don't have to save up a lot of money first, and you don't need to physically take care of the place. And you're right - for some people, those are all really important things! There are nice things about owning your own place, too. Renters aren't "second-class citizens" just because they can't pay what other renters are willing to pay, any more than owners are "second class citizens" when home values drop and they're on the hook for hundreds of thousands of dollars in underwater mortgages, or when they want to move but can't sell their home, or when the roof falls in and they have to pay for repairs. That's not what "second class citizens" means.

But you're only focused on your own problems, I get that. Everyone else needs to give you nice things, for free, or else they're "greedy."

The thing is that you, as an adult, have to pick one set of benefits and problems. You don't get to have all the benefits of renting without the downsides, or all the benefits of owning without those downsides. I mean, you can go ahead and whine about it, but that doesn't change the fact that you want all the benefits with none of the work or risk.
40
It's time for PDX to mobilize. It pays to fight. Remember " No fluoride means no fluoride " PDX was unified. It's the most beautiful political thing I have ever seen.
We need to treat them like they treat us. Run them out. People who can't care about what they do to other need to go. They don't give back. They just suck. If everyone does their part we can take PDX back. Make them hate it here. Or I promise you. You will hate Portland bitterly
People who only care about themselves make horrible choices for their community. They don't like public transit. They have to look at poor people, and no will see the new Beemer.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.