It's time to start taking back our "rights". How dare these supervisors tell landlords who they can and can't rent to? I personally do background checks for my clients in my business (I do legal work for evictions) and see everything about a person when I run these checks. Small things like traffic tickets and such do not disqualify a person from consideration, but someone with fraud or some kind of theft certainly will! Maybe these folks with these records should think twice before committing crimes, and once they do, they SHOULD have consequences! Why are we making their lives "easier" when they do not obey the law?? Now, this does right now only apply to unincorporated areas of Alameda County but hold on tight as we know some of our city councils are quick to follow suit. Pay attention and have a voice. This is not the place of our local government to get into our business in such ways. These crazy people are still disallowing evictions in our county after almost 3 years, with no end in sight! Of course, many tenants are taking full advantage of this and simply not paying. Time to put an end to this pure madness!

"The Wilma Chan Fair Chance Housing ordinance passed with the support of four out of five supervisors." What was the vote? Who was the one Supervisor who voted against this? Doesn't the media have a responsibility to tell the electorate an accurate accounting of the votes of our elected representatives?

All I can say is that I am glad I'm not a landlord in Alameda County, or California for that matter. I foresee a loss of the much needed housing as landlords are pushed from all sides until it no longer makes sense to be in the rental market, speaking at least for individual property owners - maybe corporates can float the boat.

"Maybe these folks with these records should think twice before committing crimes, and once they do, they SHOULD have consequences! Why are we making their lives "easier" when they do not obey the law??"


Standard operating procedure for "progressives". Everyone is a "victim" of something, things going wrong are always the "fault" of society, and no one is responsible for their bad behaviors/poor decision making. If you think this is a problem now, it is going to get much worse with Pamela Price as the Alameda County DA. Expect fewer charges/prosecutions and more people being let out on the streets - because it's "equitable".

Glad to hear this was passed. Once a person has done their time, they should have the same opportunities to put any of their skills or talents to work and put a roof over their head as anyone else. Some peoples' preference is that a criminal conviction should not only result in prison and restitution, but in permanent destitution. I cannot see the justice or honor in that.

Supervisor Dave Brown said, ''Wilma Chan and I have been strong supporters of removing discrimination and providing the support formerly incarcerated residents need for successful reentry." No, Mr. Brown, YOU are not providing the support -- you are forcing landlords to provide the support, and on their dime. Housing providers are going to need to raise rents, or leave the business. Maybe your end-game is to acquire all the properties and make them public housing, paid for by taxpayers.

Fifty two percent of Alameda County residents are renters, 48% are owner occupied, due to affordability the discrepancy will continue to rise. These Alameda County public officials want to be elected, or reelected, and will continue to search for votes.

All the people that support this are not rental property owners…..the irony

Pleasanton Parent, the only irony here is that you presume to know the minds of this ordinance's supporters while in fact knowing nothing about it at all. I, in fact, own four rental properties, all in Stanislaus County. To my knowledge, I've rented to ex-convicts twice, and neither of them gave me any trouble. One largely kept to himself and the other was very forthcoming about his record. I can only recall one of them missing the rent once, when his seasonal job ended and he was struggling to get hired elsewhere given his record. He instead helped me with some leasehold improvements in lieu of rent that month, and was able to find some work right after.

This seems simple to me: if we as a society desire to punish offenders more than their current statutory sentences, we should increase their sentences. But we say that those who've done their sentences have repaid their debt to society, and so therefore its unconscionable to prevent them from seeking employment and housing in good faith since that debt has been paid. Anybody who thinks that there are simply good people and bad people, and bad people must always be locked up or consigned to some far away ghetto, is deeply naive and morally compromised.

People should not be punished for theft crimes the rest of their lives, and discrimination in employment and housing do contribute to homelessness. BUT Alameda County supervisors need to end the eviction moratorium now. Alameda County and LA are the only two that have not ended it. Sure, landlords should take a chance on ex-cons, but they should not be barred from evicting them if they stop paying rent or become destructive, or violate the lease.

I would like to see a link to the actual language of the Wilma Chan Fair Chance Housing ordinance.

My main concern- does the ordinance forbid landlords from accepting any and all prior convictions, including violent crimes like domestic violence, rape, murder, manslaughter and child sexual abuse? If I were a landlord, I would not rent to anyone with convictions of the mentioned above crimes.

Ian,
You bring up a fair point, if people have served their time / consequences, you’re right, they deserve to integrate back into society.

My paranoid intuition is, by June 2023 to December 2024, we will observe great change in everything we think we know…… a true awakening, Web Link