The author says "In my experience as a tenant advocate, the most frequent cause for no-cause evictions was that the landlord had decided to make cosmetic improvements to justify a rent increase." Really? Does he have facts to support this claim or is this just his limited third party experience? 

Does the author own a house? I can't find an ownership that corresponds to his name. Does he own rentals or have any experience with renting a house in Lane County? Especially to "severely rent burdened" tenants?

"Landlords would give 90 days’ notice and pay moving expenses to reduce the likelihood their decision would cause their tenants to become homeless." This poorly conceived feature in HB 2004 will create more owner risk and expense, resulting in higher and more selective rents. 

Is the author's encouragement for more rent control (aka "homeless protection") reasoned beyond his superficial opinions or is it just a political pitch?