Comment Detail

Comment

I understand that ss a result of tenants organizing, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) is deciding whether to demand tenant protections if landlords want public money for their business, and that these protections could include regulations on rent hikes, evictions, discrimination and more. I also understand that the FHFA is seeking comments from communities to inform this decision.

I, myself, have lived in one of the dwindling SRO's left here in Oakland, CA, for the last 13 years. It would be great to purchase our building into a community land trust to preserve the housing and gain a greater sense of corporate ownership. This said, I also understand costs of nearly everything have risen, and that rent hikes do serve to pay for needful things at properties. But it's my opinion that rental rates ought to correspond with actual costs, whatever they are, whether immediate (day-to-day), mid-term (property taxes), or long-term (replacing a roof, cosmetic renovations, the like)...and not correspond to what the landlord would like in their pocket. The latter tends to be about greed, and that's not right.

Please consider well how best to put protections in place that protect everyone -- tenants, managers, landlords -- and that take into consideration the real need to cover rising costs without fleecing anyone's pockets at folks' expense.

Thank you!