Salem council sends condo-conversion ordinance back to committee after debate over timing of relocation payments

Salem City Council on Thursday voted to send an ordinance on condominium conversions back to committee after more than an hour of debate over how and when relocation payments to tenants should be made.

The council’s decision came after councilors debated an amendment that would have required 50% of relocation benefits be paid 15 days before a tenant’s move and the remaining 50% within 10 days after the tenant vacated the unit. The amendment to strike that 50%/15-day requirement failed on a 5-5 roll call. Councilor Marcela then moved to send the ordinance back to committee; that motion passed 9-1.

The dispute centered on implementation details and administrative burden. Laurie Stewart, the city’s housing stability coordinator, told the council the ordinance’s original language already allowed owners to make payments to moving companies, realtors, storage facilities or successor landlords before a move “upon the request of the tenant,” and that adding prescriptive dates would create “a documentation and administrative severe challenge.” Stewart said the ordinance gives the housing office enforcement tools, including the authority to deny or revoke permits and fines for violations.

Councilor Merkel, who offered the amendment to remove the 50%/15-day requirement, said she was deferring to the housing staff’s expertise but wanted to preserve flexibility for staff to assist tenants. “I do respect the intent of the 15-day prior payment,” Merkel said, but also noted the ordinance already allows payments prior to move-out and warned that a fixed schedule could make administration harder.

Councilor Cohen and others argued the 15-day-upfront requirement would materially help tenants who need cash flow to secure new housing. Cohen said some tenants could require “a few thousand dollars before they move out” to cover moving or storage costs and that making part of the relocation benefit available before move-out “really makes a big difference.” Several councilors, including Marcela and Watsonfeld, said they wanted more input from the housing staff and preferred to refine the language in committee.

Because the council did not adopt the amendment on the floor, and because multiple members asked for clearer language and operational input, the council returned the whole item to committee for wordsmithing and follow-up with housing staff before a final vote.

Votes at a glance: On Councilor Merkel’s motion to strike the 50%/15-day language — 5 yes, 5 no, 1 absent (motion failed). On Councilor Marcela’s motion to send the ordinance back to committee — 9 yes, 1 no (motion carried).

The committee will reconvene with housing staff to finalize language on timing, exceptions and enforcement before the ordinance returns to the full council for further passage.