City Government

Oakland Calls for Repeal of State Law Restricting Renter Protections

Published

10 years ago

July 8, 2016

The Oakland City Council voted unanimously on Tuesday to support a resolution urging state lawmakers and Governor Jerry Brown to repeal or modernize the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prohibits rent protections for housing built in the past 30 years.

“The Costa-Hawkins law has been a factor in rent increases dramatically beyond the pace of inflation,” said City Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan, who co-sponsored the resolution with Councilmember Dan Kalb. “The reality is that Costa-Hawkins has resulted in ‘unwarranted’ rent increases in unprotected rental units, exacerbating not only Oakland’s housing crisis but regionally as well.”

Adopted by the California State Legislature in 1995, Costa-Hawkins allows unlimited increases of rents and exempts certain units from rent control for housing constructed after 1983.

After being signed into law, the housing crises worsened in cities like Oakland and San Francisco, and problems caused by Costa-Hawkins began to receive more attention.

In 2013, advocates and legislators came close to changing the law, which would have dramatically reduced Costa-Hawkins’ restrictions on renter protection.

However, Governor Brown– whose Oakland property went up for sale this year at $2,595,000–ultimately vetoed the legislation.

Kaplan and Kalb’s recommendation urges the state to remove the roadblock to many efforts and ordinances that could better protect renters and prevent displacement.

“Repealing or at least substantially modernizing the Costa-Hawkins law will allow local governments to stabilize rents and an important tool to reduce displacement of families and communities,” said Kaplan.

In addition, Kaplan stated that the original exemption made for single-family homes was likely done in an attempt to exempt people who own only one home from rent control laws.

In today’s housing climate, however, where major investment firms are buying up large numbers of houses, the councilmember said, “It makes no sense to treat those large landlords, often multi-national corporations, as exempt from the laws that would apply if they rented out apartments.”

Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney expressed hesitancy at the meeting cautioning of a “slippery slope” by removing Costa-Hawkins, but agreed it is time for legislators to reevaluate the law, which she said needs to be “modernized to address the current housing conditions.”

“In this unprecedented housing crisis, it is important that we explore all viable options to preserve affordability, prevent displacement, and make it easier for working people to live in our community,” Kaplan said.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Local Lawmakers Pushing for Bail Reform to “Fix Broken System”

Don't Miss

Proposal Would “Undermine” Oakland Cannabis Industry Reform

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of December 31, 2025 – January 6, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 31, 2025 – January 6, 2026

Published

2 weeks ago

January 2, 2026

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of December 24 – 30, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 24 – 30, 2025

Published

3 weeks ago

December 25, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

Oakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition

In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”

Published

4 weeks ago

December 21, 2025

Oakland Post

At the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference, Flock Safety introduces new public safety technology – Amplified Intelligence, a suite of AI-powered tools designed to improve law enforcement investigations. Courtesy photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland City Council this week approved a $2.25 million contract with Flock Safety for a mass surveillance network of hundreds of security cameras to track vehicles in the city.

In recent weeks hundreds of local residents have spoken against the camera system, raising concerns that data will be shared with immigration authorities and other federal agencies at a time when mass surveillance is growing across the country with little regard for individual rights.

The Flock network, supported by the Oakland Police Department, has the backing of residents and councilmembers who see it as an important tool to protect public safety.

“This system makes the Department more efficient as it allows for information related to disruptive/violent criminal activities to be captured … and allows for precise and focused enforcement,” OPD wrote in its proposal to City Council.

According to OPD, police made 232 arrests using data from Flock cameras between July 2024 and November of this year.

Based on the data, police say they recovered 68 guns, and utilizing the countywide system, they have found 1,100 stolen vehicles.

However, Flock’s cameras cast a wide net. The company’s cameras in Oakland last month captured license plate numbers and other information from about 1.4 million vehicles.

Speaking at Tuesday’s Council meeting, Fife was critical of her colleagues for signing a contract with a company that has been in the national spotlight for sharing data with federal agencies.

Flock’s cameras – which are automated license plate readers – have been used in tracking people who have had abortions, monitoring protesters, and aiding in deportation roundups.

“I don’t know how we get up and have several press conferences talking about how we are supportive of a sanctuary city status but then use a vendor that has been shown to have a direct relationship with (the U.S.) Border Control,” she said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”

Several councilmembers who voted in favor of the contract said they supported the deal as long as some safeguards were written into the Council’s resolution.

“We’re not aiming for perfection,” said District 1 Councilmember Zac Unger. “This is not Orwellian facial recognition technology — that’s prohibited in Oakland. The road forward here is to add as many amendments as we can.”

Amendments passed by the Council prohibit OPD from sharing camera data with any other agencies for the purpose of “criminalizing reproductive or gender affirming healthcare” or for federal immigration enforcement. California state law also prohibits the sharing of license plate reader data with the federal government, and because Oakland’s sanctuary city status, OPD is not allowed to cooperate with immigration authorities.

A former member of Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission has sued OPD, alleging that it has violated its own rules around data sharing.

So far, OPD has shared Flock data with 50 other law enforcement agencies.