City Government
Stockton City Council Unanimously Passes Rent Control Ordinance, Bans No-fault Evictions
The Stockton City Council unanimously passed a rent control ordinance Tuesday night that adopts Assembly Bill 1482, capping rent increases to 5 percent annually. That will go into effect immediately.
By adopting the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, or AB 1482, the city also immediately bans no-fault evictions in the city, ahead of the bill’s Jan. 1, 2020 implementation. Under the new ordinance, landlords will only be able to evict tenants if they have a reason — like not paying rent or breaking their lease agreement.
In a 3 bedroom, 2 bath home in North Stockton, Tam-me Jackson, husband Ed and recent college graduate and son Nijer have rented seven years. But, it hasn’t been easy.
“I think it’s pretty difficult to be a renter in Stockton,” said Jackson.
Jackson works two jobs as social worker and marriage and family therapist. Her husband, a former warehouse supervisor, is disabled. Their rent was $1,100, but her landlord increased it this month to $1,300. That’s an 18 percent increase.
“He has let me know that he knows my rent is under market. So, I’m sure he’s looking to get it to at the market rate,” added Jackson.
Jackson says it causes anxiety not knowing when or how much her rent could go up again. That’s why Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs is proposing an emergency amendment to the city code to limit the rental increases yearly to 5 percent, plus cost of living.
That coincides with a new state law in 2020. Tubbs says it can’t wait.
“So, what we’re doing is saying the state law goes into effect in January. Let’s make it in effect today so that [on] Thanksgiving and Christmas we don’t have people being evicted for no reason,” Tubbs said.
As you might imagine, landlords have a much different opinion when it comes to the rent control proposal.
Steve Smith is a veteran Stockton landlord who manages properties for his mother. He says rent control just means more regulations and takes away the incentive for investors to purchase properties.
“Most of the people that own rentals in this community, houses, for instance, most of them are people that didn’t work for the city, didn’t work for the county, didn’t work for a large corporation that had pensions. They saved their money for 30 years to buy one, two, three houses and that is their retirement. And, that’s what I’m protecting,” said Smith.
Jackson works with adults with disabilities and says rent increases aren’t keeping up with their incomes.
“They’re on fixed incomes and I’m seeing their rents get increased and landlords not taking into consideration they’re not getting more money,” said Jackson.
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
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.
Activism
Oakland Post: Week of December 24 – 30, 2025
The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 24 – 30, 2025
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.
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.”
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 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.”
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.
-
Activism3 weeks agoDesmond Gumbs — Visionary Founder, Mentor, and Builder of Opportunity
-
Activism3 weeks agoFamilies Across the U.S. Are Facing an ‘Affordability Crisis,’ Says United Way Bay Area
-
Alameda County3 weeks agoOakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition
-
Alameda County3 weeks agoBling It On: Holiday Lights Brighten Dark Nights All Around the Bay
-
Activism3 weeks agoBlack Arts Movement Business District Named New Cultural District in California
-
Activism3 weeks agoLu Lu’s House is Not Just Toying Around with the Community
-
Activism3 weeks agoOakland Post: Week of December 17 – 23, 2025
-
Activism2 weeks agoFirst 5 Alameda County Distributes Over $8 Million in First Wave of Critical Relief Funds for Historically Underpaid Caregivers



