7 minute read

Election 2024: Rent Control Ballot Initiative Another “Perfect Storm”

The level of “chicken little” panic that occurs these days is tiresome. Tuning into any media outlet, covering any topic, you will find that every situation is “the worst possible situation” for everything.

Remember the “Hurricane” that we had a few months ago?

Remember how the auto market was going to crash and cripple the economy?

Remember how the Transfer Portal was destroying College Football?

It does not stop there...

• Gasoline is the most expensive that it has ever been.

• College admissions are the hardest they have ever been.

• Infrastructure is the least maintained it has ever been.

• Food production is the worst it has ever been.

And now...the cost of housing is the highest it has ever been, and our old friend at AIDS Healthcare Foundation has a solution for who will pay for it— You!

Michael Weinstein is at it again, seeking You to endure most of the cost of housing.

Yes, the same Michael Weinstein who brought us Propositions 10 and 21, which sought to expand rent control in our state, will be back this November with yet another ballot initiative seeking to not only expand rent control, but also eliminate other protections for landlords provided under the CostaHawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995.

“Wait... is this the same guy that the LA Times exposed as a slumlord in several different articles, and that The Real Deal showed has provided “Inhumane Conditions” in his AIDS Health Care Foundation operated housing on Skid Row in LA?”

Yeah...that is the one—and to take it a step further, he has called his opponents antisemitic for organizing against him...which is as empty an accusation as is his claim that he cares about tenants’ rights.

Granted, he has lost a great deal of his power and political influence since Proposition 21 was defeated by a 60/40 margin, but that does not mean his proposal has lost support.

In fact, if anything, it has gained traction due to continued increases in housing costs since 2020 when he last launched this offensive on the rentalhousing industry. Beyond that we have seen a slew of tenant protection laws come into effect across the state, and through Sacramento since Proposition 21 was defeated.

Additionally, tenants’ rights groups are organizing across the state. Currently, there are at least 11 different cities in California that will have rent control related initiatives on their November ballots.

• A statewide initiative

• 11 local initiatives

• Organized support for the concept

• A high turn-out election in November; and

• Escalating housing costs being top of mind.

As much as I hate the alarmist nature of our current state of politics, we are facing a massive uphill battle. And I have not even mentioned the worst part yet.

The cost of running statewide campaigns has risen significantly as well. With the expansion of digital communications, social media engagement, and micro-targeting messaging, we can identify and activate the right people to show up to vote and execute successful campaigns. However, that ability comes with a great financial cost.

Which is why our fundraising efforts at AAOC are so critical.

We need You to come through and represent to this state that we will not allow such a divisive individual to dictate how we should operate our rental housing businesses when he cannot even keep the rental properties he operates up to code.

There are now seven months until the election.

• Seven months to step up and defend your industry.

• Seven months to protect your property investments.

• Seven months to protect your business.

If every member of our association

Watch — continued on page 12

Watch — continued from 10 contributed $500 + $50 per unit to the AAOC Multi-County Property Rights PAC—those funds could have a meaningful impact in the statewide effort to defeat this year’s “Justice for Renters Act” ballot initiative.

Even better we would be able to support:

• An effort to raise the vote threshold to pass taxes in this state; and

• Qualify and pass an initiative that would put an end to this deceptive practice of non-profits using ancillary revenue to fund ballot initiatives that attack our industry.

Make your contribution today!

Donate online at www.aaoc.com/ store/aaoc-issues-pac or mail a check payable to “AAOC Multi-County Property Rights PAC” to 1601 E Orangewood Ave., Suite 125, Anaheim, CA 92805.

Sacramento — continued from 8

Expansion of enforcement actions of the state Civil Rights Department (CRD).

Existing law authorizes the CRD to enforce civil rights laws relating to housing and employment. For decades the department has sought to gain and maintain the rights of individuals’ employment and housing free from discriminatory practices. Recent changes in the law also authorizes the state attorney general, the county district attorney, city attorney, or any person discriminated against to file a civil lawsuit when there is reasonable cause to believe someone is infringing on civil rights. The law also allows for civil remedies for civil rights violations and penalties. The remedies can be quite significant. AB 2232, by Assembly Member Brian Maienschein (D—San Diego), would extend the authority to bring a civil action. It is important to note that the CRD, like the attorney general, county district attorney, city attorney, or any other person generally writes the complaint, would investigate it and makes a determination if a discriminatory practice may have occurred at no charge. The ever-present question is how much more authority is needed to investigate a discriminatory practice?

Obligations of lessors to make repairs.

Current law requires lessors to maintain rental properties and dwellings and to undertake necessary repairs to make the property habitable. Exceptions to this requirement include if the lessee significantly violates the lease and causes a material breach of contract. AB 2059 by Assembly Member Heath Flora (R - Ripon) seeks to amend current state law which would allow a reasonable time to rectify repairs. The measure proposes that a repair undertaken within 30 days post-notification is considered sufficient evidence that the lessor acted with a reasonable timeframe, thus the lessor would be given a rebuttable presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence. We like the direction of the bill but note that it has a long way to go. If the author is to be successful, the bill will likely have to undergo significant amendments. One of the amendments that must be addressed is to maintain the obligation of a lessor to respond to emergencies, interior premises water repairs, etc.

AT&T proposes to abandon landline service.

AT&T is facing mounting criticism and opposition over its proposal to scrap landline service in most of the state. Increasing opposition is now coming cities and counties, rural areas, seniors, and the disabled communities. The opposition claims that residents could be left without a communications lifeline in case of a natural disaster, power outage, or health crises. Counties are threatening to subpoena to obtain information about how cutting landlines could adversely affect rural residents.

AT&T has applied to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to be dropped as the “carrier of last resort,” a designation requiring it to provide phone service to anyone wanting it in its service area. The telecommunications giant argues that fewer than 7% of households in its territory uses traditional landline services which, because of the requirement no longer serves a “valid public purpose.” Further, AT&T claims that cell phone and internet phone service can replace landlines and in the event of power outage and disaster-damaged infrastructure have shown those technologies to be unreliable. AT&T also believes that copper landlines are outdated and there are more advanced technologies that are available which include higher speed communications like fiber and wireless.

Stay tuned for updates on these bills as the year progresses.

Next month, we will feature other substantive and extremely important issues that would affect rental housing providers.

This article is from: