Palo Alto bans eviction of tenants who can't pay rent during pandemic | Town Square | Palo Alto Online |

Town Square

Post a New Topic

Palo Alto bans eviction of tenants who can't pay rent during pandemic

Original post made on Mar 24, 2020

Palo Alto landlords will not be allowed to evict residential tenants whose ability to pay rent is being hindered by the coronavirus pandemic under a law that the City Council unanimously approved on Monday night.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, March 23, 2020, 11:10 PM

Comments (15)

35 people like this
Posted by common sense
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 24, 2020 at 5:19 am

Since the city is sitting on a surplus from the previous year, they should pay the person's rent, instead of saying the landlord should wait for the rent. then the tenant can repay the city in 120 days.

Same for commercial tenants/small businesses. this would help alot of small businesses survive this pandemic.

How easy is it for the council to give away other people's money


13 people like this
Posted by Angie
a resident of Crescent Park
on Mar 24, 2020 at 6:13 am

This is a little misleading about the public comment. People did not attend the meeting but they got a record number of emails from residents about this - not just 2 nonprofit letters.


13 people like this
Posted by Joe
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 24, 2020 at 9:02 am

When business is before the Council, there ought to be some notice by the City Clerk of the number of emails and letters received by the Clerk's Office. This number would then be in the public record, as well as known to the Council before discussing and voting on City business.


31 people like this
Posted by Rambutan
a resident of Ventura
on Mar 24, 2020 at 9:19 am

Thank you Council for taking action to protect the health of our entire community by preventing more people from becoming homeless.

Economic recovery will have to wait as we prioritize our health.


12 people like this
Posted by Concerned
a resident of Downtown North
on Mar 24, 2020 at 1:22 pm

I would like to reiterate what was posted by "common sense" (quoted below). It is an unfair burden to put on rental property owners, not when it's the City that should be helping its citizens. This is basically making rental property owners give out short-term loans without any compensation (interest, etc) or regard for their ability to do so, shouldn't that be the City or County's job?

"Since the city is sitting on a surplus from the previous year, they should pay the person's rent, instead of saying the landlord should wait for the rent. then the tenant can repay the city in 120 days.

Same for commercial tenants/small businesses. this would help alot of small businesses survive this pandemic.

How easy is it for the council to give away other people's money"


3 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 24, 2020 at 1:30 pm

Posted by Concerned, a resident of Downtown North

>> I would like to reiterate what was posted by "common sense" (quoted below). It is an unfair burden to put on rental property owners, not when it's the City that should be helping its citizens. This is basically making rental property owners give out short-term loans without any compensation (interest, etc) or regard for their ability to do so,

>> Same for commercial tenants/small businesses. this would help a lot of small businesses survive this pandemic.

I'm happy to force XYZ Corp with billions in assets to defer rents, but, not happy to force the little people to do it.

>> How easy is it for the council to give away other people's money"

Any such program should focus on helping with the hardest case: the little people who owe rent to other little people, including, for example, non-profit low-income housing providers, and retired people who rent out small units to working people.


13 people like this
Posted by Family Friendly
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Mar 24, 2020 at 1:41 pm

The writing's been on the wall for quite some time about people who rent out their homes. If the rent control advocates don't get you, the "emergency measures" will.

As I've said before, though, a healthy community is built by long-term owners -- not short-term renters. If this encourages people to sell their homes to new Palo Altans, so much the better.


6 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 24, 2020 at 2:16 pm

Posted by Family Friendly, a resident of Old Palo Alto

>> As I've said before, though, a healthy community is built by long-term owners -- not short-term renters. If this encourages people to sell their homes to new Palo Altans, so much the better.

I'm not sure I understand your point, so, excuse me if I got it wrong. But, it *sounds* like ageism. Thanks, but, no thanks.


23 people like this
Posted by laura farabough
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 24, 2020 at 2:38 pm

I deeply appreciate the non-eviction mandate.
I have lived in my 1-bdrm apt in Palo Alto for 8 years
I am terrified of eviction. I am a 70 yr old gig-economy worker. I work as a dog walker and pet/house sitter to supplement my SS. My business has disappeared. Live in my car at this age?
Because of the generosity of my friends, I will be paying my rent in April and May.
June? Who knows.
My landlady, who is a kind person, has to care for both her parents who suffer from advanced dementia.
They live at home and refuse to move into a "memory care" assisted living facility.
She pays for a 2-person 24hr care program that depends on the income from her rental property.
What are either of us supposed to do?
I think rental owners should also be given some support if they meet certain criteria (i.e., they are not corporate
rental outfits).



Like this comment
Posted by Churb the Coal
a resident of Stanford
on Mar 24, 2020 at 3:55 pm

I like Palo Alto.


7 people like this
Posted by Nayeli
a resident of Midtown
on Mar 24, 2020 at 11:57 pm

What if a requirement of any sort of mortgage moratorium or forbearance also required this benefit to be passed down to renters too? In other words, if you're going to receive some sort of exemption for paying a mortgage on your rental property, then you should be required to do the same with your tenants?


2 people like this
Posted by 40YearsARenter
a resident of South of Midtown
on Mar 25, 2020 at 9:07 am

Long term renters also contribute to healthy community. I huddle. Will fork over my social security check and then some , but I’m gonna roll back rent, take it or leave it, to 2017 amount. Take it or leave it. Arbitrary increases devastated. “We shall not be moved...” Stand up for justice, not property owners’ cruises...!


Like this comment
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Mar 25, 2020 at 11:04 am

Posted by 40YearsARenter, a resident of South of Midtown

>> Long term renters also contribute to healthy community. I huddle. Will fork over my social security check and then some , but I’m gonna roll back rent, take it or leave it, to 2017 amount. Take it or leave it. Arbitrary increases devastated. “We shall not be moved...” Stand up for justice, not property owners’ cruises...!

It is difficult to understand what you are really trying to say here, but, well, if you are talking about one of the ginormous management corporation -- well, do your thing. Don't be surprised if their lawyer is better than yours in court, though. OTOH, If you are talking about a "small" landlord who really needs that income to survive, then, I have a problem with your attitude. In fact, I would go so far as to say that in that case you are harming *yourself* morally as well as victimizing another person of limited means. We are all depending on each other's good behavior to survive this calamity. Don't create more casualties.


Like this comment
Posted by C
a resident of Palo Verde
on Mar 25, 2020 at 4:28 pm

>> The writing's been on the wall for quite some time about people who rent out their homes. If the rent control advocates don't get you, the "emergency measures" will.

That's why landlords have to charge high rent, before they're forced not to.

>> As I've said before, though, a healthy community is built by long-term owners -- not short-term renters. If this encourages people to sell their homes to new Palo Altans, so much the better.

That's why rents are higher. Fewer rental units means less supply. A decrease in supply with no decrease in demand means higher rental prices.

Can't speak for other landlords, but our tenants include two parties of high-tech workers, and a doctor. Silicon Valley is pretty much named after tech companies, and I'm pretty sure the doctor will be contributing to community pretty darn soon, perhaps to a family member of a Palo Alto home owner very soon.


Like this comment
Posted by 40YearsARenter
a resident of South of Midtown
on Mar 25, 2020 at 6:05 pm

Hello "C" and y'all:
Yenta the Renter here, "Can't speak for other landlords, but our tenants include two parties of high-tech workers, and a doctor. Silicon Valley is pretty much named after tech companies, and I'm pretty sure the doctor will be contributing to community pretty darn soon, perhaps to a family member of a Palo Alto home owner very soon."

*Doctors, tech-workers, all Chiefs, No Indians. Everybody contributes, now or later. Build Back Better, build some more affordable rentals, BMR studios, so the community can retain what (little) diversity it has - and Grandma can stay put, and hope that some of the kids some of the time will be able to fly and visit...or bike and visit.

Does that mean Palo Alto might one day look like Queens...? (Hmmm). I heard that once even Rome fell.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields


Get fact-based reporting on the COVID-19 crisis sent to your inbox daily.

'A devastating impact:' The coronavirus claims Clarke's Charcoal Broiler, Mountain View's oldest operating restaurant
By Elena Kadvany | 29 comments | 11,640 views

Coronavirus Food Safety Update + New! Insider Tips
By Laura Stec | 7 comments | 4,695 views

A Pragmatic Approach to A Trillion Trees
By Sherry Listgarten | 1 comment | 3,300 views

The University of California’s flexible policies during COVID-19
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 6 comments | 2,299 views

Repairing a Disagreement with your Beloved & “Physical” vs. “Social” Distancing
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 2,099 views

 

DEADLINE EXTENDED

The 34th Annual Palo Alto Weekly Short Story Contest is now accepting entries for Adult, Young Adult and Teen categories. Send us your short story (2,500 words or less) and entry form by April 10, 2020. First, Second and Third Place prizes awarded in each category. Sponsored by Kepler's Books, Linden Tree Books and Bell's Books.

Contest Details