Berkeley is considering a groundbreaking proposal that would be the first of its kind in California: to prohibit landlords from restricting tenants with dogs, cats, and small animals under 25 pounds. The proposal, created by Berkeley Councilmember Jesse Arreguin, went to vote on Tuesday, but will go for further review and clarification over the next few months.
If you've ever owned a pet as a tenant in the Bay Area, you know why this proposal could be huge. For one, there's such a dearth of rentals that allow for any kind of pet, at any cost. And even if you live in an apartment that allows you to have an animal companion, you either have to pay through the nose for it or you feel like you can never, ever move again. These restrictions don't actually prevent all people from having pets, anyway – some tenants just become sneakier and more dishonest to keep them, whether it be hiding their animals from landlords or lying about their pets being service animals, which are the only "pets" that are allowed under law to live in any and all housing. Neither of these situations is ideal, especially the latter, which is really detrimental to the community of people who actually needs legitimate service animals to function and be emotionally and physically healthy.
And the service animal problem is what actually inspired Arreguin to create the proposal. He believes that allowing more people to legally have pets will bring down the number of tenants falsely claiming the need for emotional-support animals. It would also cut down on the number of animals who are taken to shelters (and that have to eventually be put down when they can't be adopted) when their owners can't find new housing that allows for their animals. Under current state law, landlords can prohibit certain breeds, most commonly pit bulls. If you've ever been to an animal shelter, you'll see way too many pit bulls, a heartbreaking effect of breed discrimination.
Under Arreguin's proposal, landlords must permit pets as long as the rental has reasonable living space for it, that it's well behaved and doesn't disturb other renters, and that the owner will be responsible for any damages incurred by it. Landlords can evict tenants who don't keep up with their end of the bargain – if their pet is a danger to other people or the apartment itself. The details beyond this are still a little fuzzy (like will there be a maximum size restriction at all?), and of course, not everyone is happy about the proposal.
The main opponents are landlords. According to The San Francisco Chronicle, the Berkeley Property Owners Association is less than thrilled with the idea, which they think will just cause more problems. One example, which is actually legitimate, is health problems that current and future tenants may have from being exposed to allergens from pets. One Berkeley landlord told the Chron, "Once a unit has housed a dog or cat, it’s sometimes impossible to clean the unit enough for someone with allergies, especially if the unit has a carpet." Others say that allowing pets will bring up rent and security deposits for all tenants in an already high-priced and competitive area.
It's clear that a compromise between the two sides has to happen before any real law can pass, but it's a hopeful first step for giving some relief to hundreds of Bay Area pet owners who would do anything to legally have a secure and comfortable home with their beloved companions.
[Via: SFGate, East Bay Express, Daily Californian; photo via Thinkstock]