Tenants Outraged By Nuisance Eviction Ordinance

Tenants Outraged By Nuisance Eviction Ordinance

Oakland Strives To Be The City Of Intolerance

By Lynda Carson March 19, 2004

Oakland CA--In a move that is certain to please bankers, realtors, landlords and developers, on March 16, Oakland's City Council moved another step closer to ensure that the notorious Nuisance Eviction Ordinance (NEO), may soon be used to weaken long established eviction protections for all of Oakland's renters.

The Nuisance Eviction Ordinance (NEO), requires landlords to evict anyone that is targeted and deemed to be a nuisance by the City of Oakland. Renters need not be arrested, cited or convicted of anything to face eviction under the NEO.

Despite the loud boisterous objections of a well organized crowd of opponents to the NEO, landlords and City Officials took pains to create the impression that Oakland's renters may be a bunch of pimps, prostitutes, and violent drug dealers before the 6 to 1 vote in favor of the tweaked version of the NEO took place before an outraged citizenry. The new NEO version comes back on April 6 before the City Council for a final vote and passage into law.

As the heated rhetoric over the NEO recently exploded into a public debate, Deputy City Attorney Richard Illgen became the front man to promote the NEO by exclaiming that Oakland's renters have illegal activities going on all around them and needed protection. Renters and their supporters opposed to the NEO responded and challenged City Officials to address the real needs of society and to stop pandering to special interests that may profit by those that demonize the poor.

According to Vivian Lee and Sitara Nieves of Critical Resistance, "The NEO, as it's currently written, permits eviction without conviction -- and without an appeals process. With little due process, evictions could be initiated by a disgruntled neighbor or, in the case of landlords, for financial gain. Property rights advocates should be concerned that landlords would be forced to evict their tenants based on mere hearsay from the police or other neighbors," said Lee and Nieves.

Tuesday's City Hall meeting was packed with a loud energetic crowd that repeatedly chanted, "No On N-E-O," before the NEO vote took place, and Councilmember Ignacio De La Fuente on several occaisions threatened to chase everyone out of the chamber if they continued their chants. Some were removed from the council chamber by the Police as the evening wore on.

At least 35 speakers were signed up to voice their support or opposition to the NEO, and many represented progressive organizations on behalf of the renters, while others represented landlords or different factions of the Neighborhood Crime Prevention Council's known as the NCPC's. By far, the majority of the speakers were opposed to the NEO.

Landlord Sylvester Grisbey, addressed the council to say, "I support the NEO because it will save me money, and help clean up the community. It cost me $2,000 to evict a drug dealer from my property, and the NEO gives landlords the opportunity to have the power."

Indeed, under the NEO, Oakland subsidizes the eviction of renters for the landlords. The designated case manager and the City Attorney's Office will administratively collect the evidence used against the renters. They will create files on renters from a source of snitches and information provided by the Police or public agencies and may freely offer the files to the landlords evicting their renters.

The NEO gives landlords the power to get around well established renter's protections and subsidizes evictions in the process.

Oakland's version of the NEO is much more draconian than the version used in Los Angeles (LA), and records show that most renters that were served eviction notices under the NEO in LA, never bothered to fight the eviction and left after receipt of 3 Day, 30 Day, or 60 Day Notices.

The Nuisance Eviction Ordinance is Oakland's latest scheme by City Officials to scapegoat Oakland's renters as a bunch of criminals, and no evidence was presented at the council meeting to back up their assertions. The NEO does not apply to homeowners selling dope from their residence, and the children of homeowners do not have to fear from being evicted if their suspected of illegal drug related activity.

It's the newest reason being used to weaken or demolish a well established body of state and local renter's protections that have been agreed upon in the terms of a lease or month to month rental agreement for renters in commercial properties, condominiums and apartments.

It is another part of the master plan to gentrify Oakland on behalf of the monied interests that have corrupted the balance of power in favor of the realtors, landlords, bankers and developers.

Ever since Measure EE, Oakland's eviction protections went into effect on December 27, 2002, Oakland's City Council has moved as quickly as possible to weaken eviction protections and rent control for one reason or another.

Underlying all the different reasons being used to attack renter's protections, a June 10, 2003 city staff report gets to the heart of the matter. The staff report covers the subject of properties that become exempt from renter's protections. The report concludes that properties may be sold at a higher premium when becoming exempt from renter's protections because it allows purchasers of property to qualify for higher loans based upon the increased cash flow at those properties, and will in turn increase the sale price of the properties.

As stated in the NEO Summary signed by Councilman Larry Reid, in part it is being sold to the public as an economic reason to positively impact the value of Oakland neighborhoods by evicting renters that may be accused of illegal drug related activity.

A search of the records show that violent crime levels in Oakland are down by 8% during the past year. Drug related arrests have consistantly dropped from a high of 11,405 arrests in 1990 to a low of under 4,000 arrests during February of 2003 through February of 2004. Since 1969, burglary and robbery have been at their lowest levels during 2000 through all of 2002, and theres no evidence or statistics showing that evicting renters is a deterrent to murder.

Northern California ACLU staff attorney Julie Moss said,"The language of the ordinance is so vague that tenants will not know what they have to do to avoid having eviction proceedings brought against them. You don't actually have to be engaged in illegal drug activity, you only have to have activity that usually accompanies drug activity in order to say you have a drug related nuisance. So, people not involved in drug activity could get caught up by this ordinance."

"People that are not creating a nuisance, but may be dealing with a drug addiction in the privacy of their own apartment are also included in this ordinance, and the ACLU urges the council to vote against the NEO," said Moss.

The NEO takes away well established renter's protections, and even goes as far as to offer cover for wrongful evictions because Section J says evictions are deemed to be done in good faith. The latest version of the NEO being trotted out, offers one new exception, and if the tenant being evicted can prove that the landlord withheld evidence showing their innocense, then the tenants may have the right to sue the landlord for a wrongful eviction.

Adam Gold of Just Cause Oakland denounced the NEO before the council vote took place and said, "We're tired of the council carting out these trojan horse ordinances that hurt the tenants. We can't put our faith in an ordinance that can be used to abuse the rights of Oakland's renters and we oppose the NEO."

Neighborhood Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) member Gloria Jeffrey said, "I represent the Mac Arthur NCPC and we have a bunch of neighborhood commitees, groups, citizen bands, and NCPC's collecting evidence. Thats what we've been doing. We are on the streets, we're the ones that are filling up books and books and books, and are taking pictures of criminal activities happening out on the streets."

Councilwoman Jean Quan is all for the NEO and insulted the community by stating that people should have read the ordinance before speaking out against it. She then lamented that she knows people in the NCPC's that are being threatened for their activities (snitching on neighbors) in Oakland. She went on to mentioned a woman she knows in the NCPC that has people showing up on her portch to intimidate her family, and that someone else she knows in the NCPC had a daughter threatened while in the laundry room of their building by one of their neighbors.

Rose Braz of Critical Resistance said, "We just heard from a woman talking about neighbors snitching out on each other. This ordinance relies on neighbors snitching out each other to be effective! It turns people in communities against one another. Homelessness does not build safer communities. Housing is not easy to find in Oakland, and you need to create more access to housing instead of creating more homelessness with the NEO."

Councilwoman Nancy Nadel said this ordinance does nothing to affect the problems of poverty that force people into criminal activity just to survive and that all it does is punish them.

Steve Edrington of the Rental Housing Association of Northern Alameda County said, "I support the NEO, and if your causing trouble in Oakland, you gotta go! Not every one deserves the right to have protections in Oakland."

Jonah Zern a school teacher that is with the Education Not Incarceration (ENI) Coalition said, "Closing schools and kicking people out of their homes is the same issue. Listen to the message of the ENI. We're asking for social programs for our community. We're asking you to create an inclusive community, not a divisive community that kicks out the poor for the well being of the wealthy."

At times, thunderous applause came from the packed chamber as one speaker after another got their point across to the councilmembers, and at times Councilman De La Fuente appeared to do his best to frustrate some of the speakers or use up their time to antagonize them.

Judy Appel from the Drug Policy Alliance was cut short by De La Fuente several times as she said, "This problem cannot be solved through a law that is fraught with constitutional and statuary pitfalls, and the Drug Policy Alliance opposes the NEO." The crowd yelled out in a roar several times by saying, let her speak when De La Fuente tried to stop her in mid stream.

Olivia Prater of the Black Student Union at Laney College said, "I feel that this is a conservative Jim Crow law, and I also feel that the school system is a conservative Jim Crow program. People need a good education and you should consider that, because now I see all of you with white sheets over your head."

The Councilmembers appeared to be unmoved from their position as the majority of speakers denounced the NEO and rose to the occaision in opposition to this ordinance that appeared to be promoting homelessness as a means to solve Oaklands problems.

As it turned out, Councilwoman Jane Brunner leapt from abstaining on the NEO during the February 17 vote, and came around to supporting it this time around.

Jorge Aguilar of the Eviction Defense Center said, "It is unconscionable! It's unfair to tenants, overly broad, and likely to be unconstitutional."

"I think this is awful public policy, said Sitara Nieves. Nieves who has a Bachelors Degree in Comparative Religions, is one of the organizers from Critical Resistance that helped to fill up the council chambers with people in opposition to the NEO. "This will make Oakland less safe and it's not a solution to Oakland's drug wars," said Nieves.

In contrast to many others, Michael Collins said, "The residents of the Oaks Hotel are all prostitutes, pimps and drug addicts, and everyone should drive over to 15th and Jefferson Streets to see all the action happening over there."

Like a pit bull ready for a fight, macho Layla Montarch marched up to the podium and she said, "I represent alot of neighborhoods and I do alot of work in this area of drug abatement. Evidence is coming from my neighbor people who are out there with log sheets and cameras to record the activities. We're not going to have drug dealers anymore in Oakland," she said, as she swaggered away from the podium like an angry Drill Sergeant with a bad hangover.

Local figure Hugh Bassett, said, "I must be getting old because I used to be on the same side as all the people here that are in opposition to the NEO. I'm a homeowner now, and I support the NEO."

"I live in a neighborhood with drugs and criminal activity," said Demetria McCain-Higgins. McCain-Higgins exclaimed that she has relatives that have fallen into the hands of those dealing drugs and have had friends that have been improperly arrested, tried and convicted, and she opposes the NEO. "I'm against the NEO because I understand from reading it that it's fraught with problems. Your the government and you only get one bite, and you don't get two bites. Let the criminal justice system take it's course. If the tenant gets arrested they have a fifth amendment right, but you want them to defend themselves in an administrative setting. This is only going to throw people on the streets, and not solve any safety issues. Vote no on the NEO," she said.

Periodically, Councilman De La Fuente would start calling out names again to get speakers lined up to speak their piece, and then he would go back to interrupting them as the clock was quickly ticking by, and the crowd would started up again with another chant saying, No On N-E-O, No On N-E-O, NO On N-E-O, No On N-E-O.

Dorcey Nunn had his turn and said, "I oppose the NEO because theres not any real evidence and it's based on allegations and not convictions. Your getting ready to deny people housing in Oakland without having a conviction! This is outrageous behavior, and will push people of color out of Oakland."

Elder Freeman says, "We need to deal with the source of the drugs coming into the community, not to go after it once it's been spread throughout the city. Talk to Bush and his daddy, their dope dealers."

Linda Evans from the All Of Us Or None Organizatiion, said, "We are an organization of people coming out of prison. We know we have to fight for our rights because on every front we are being subjected to terrible discrimination. I think that the NEO is just one more example of that kind of discrimination. It allows people to be evicted because of an arrest, because of hearsay, and it is unacceptable for people trying to integrate themselves back into their communities and families. I think you should seriously consider opposing this ordinance."

The council members have been trying to sell the NEO as a tool needed to protect the renters from criminals in their midst, but not even one tenant showed up to speak up in support of the NEO.

John Murcko of the Eviction Defense Center was a fire cracker when he spoke and he stirred up the crowd by saying,"This law is a sham! The source of the problem most tenants live with is not crime. It's the condition they live under. I've represented thousands of tenants, and their exposed to rats and roaches, leaky roofs and sewers backing up into their homes, and no heat in the winters. We should be passing laws against the landlords for allowing these conditions to affect the community."

Doris Stancil a former member of the Rainbow Push Coalition said, "If any of you really think that the solution to Oakland's problems is to toss our grandchildren out into the streets when they get into trouble and expect the system to take care of them, then your a damn liar!"

James Vann of the Oakland Tenants Union believes eitherway, that if it's not a conspiracy, it's a deliberate plan to take away the rights of the tenants and their eviction protections. At the podium Vann said, "This is bad law. This is terrible law. It tramples on civil rights. It tramples on human rights. It tramples on everything we're supposed to believe in."

When all was done and said, Councilman Larry Reid refused to allow any amendmends being pressed by Councilwoman Nancy Nadel that were meant to make the NEO a bit more compassionate. All the other councilmembers stepped in line to pass the NEO, except for Councilwoman Desley Brooks who failed to appear at Tuesday's meeting.

Once again, the NEO is coming up for another vote for it's final passage on April 6 at Oakland City Hall. Activists are urging people to keep hope alive and to keep on fighting this ordinance until hell freezes over.

My apologies to all the others that have not been quoted for in this story, but have made the selfless effort to oppose the NEO.

Best wishes to Father Donald Weeks and his Housing Program for his strength and compassion in standing up against the bully that threatened 30 people with an eviction, just to get at one of them.

Critical Resistance may be reached at 444-0484