Dear Editor,
Santa Monica, Berkeley, Oakland and several other cities, including Los Angeles, have well established, very “over protected” rent stabilization ordinances; therefore, Proposition 33 is redundant, unnecessary and provides no additional relief for direct benefit to California and Santa Monica renters
The 1995 Costa-Hawkins Fair Housing Act simply provided that certain “classifications” of housing would be “exempt from rent control: single family homes, condominiums, duplexes, new construction built after 1995 and of course Rental Units that become vacant.
This law also addressed “serial illegal roommate arrangements.” As your readers will recall, there were over 10,000 rental units in San Francisco which were Vacant and simply taken “off the market,” padlocked and shut. In Santa Monica, perhaps the amount may have been in the range of several thousand or more. Your readers will recall there was an “underground” black market for the rental units wherein unethical realtors and others sold the “keys” to the units for, as reported, $10,000 to $15,000.
For example, wealthy motion picture directors, producers, actors, thoracic and reconstructive surgeons bought access to these units. Extreme Rent Control not only contributes to black market misconduct, but also the vast majority of the rental stock in Santa Monica deteriorated. No new roofs, landscaping, tree trimming, or even the maintenance of the laundry rooms.
As we drove through the City, we saw that the fascia boards, wood trim and even the exterior stucco was fractured and collapsing and very old. Rental units were not scheduled for Remodeling. It destroyed the small businesses of plumbers, electricians, roofers, pest control or hardware stores.
Effective January 1, 1999, Costa-Hawkins reconfigured our laws, prevented overreaching municipalities such as Berkeley and Santa Monica from initiating vacancy control and other oppressive policies. With an open and free market, units were immediately scheduled for renovation and remodeling. and thousands of new Tenants and families came to our community.
Prop. 33 would merely allow a municipality to re-establish the “old protocols” promoted by SMRR and others, and destroy our limited housing. Owners would go out of business, much like Toys R Us, Bed, Bath and Beyond; and Red Lobster.
All of this special protection needed by Tenants has heretofore been considered, addressed and incorporated in the “Tenant Protection Act,” 2019. This 11-page new law, promoted by Tenant activists, and endorsed by former Assemblyperson Richard Bloom, current State Senator Ben Allen, Rob Bonta, David Chiu and others, provided maximum benefit and protection to tenants. There is no need for Proposition 33, as it is not only injurious and dangerous, but also unnecessary and redundant.
Every Tenant and Owner of a single family home should universally reject Proposition 33. Even the Los Angeles Times, when it discovered that the campaign for Prop. 33 was using hijacked campaign material from Vice President Kamala Harris in a deceptive, fraudulent and disingenuous TV ad, recommended and endorsed No on Prор. 33.
Michael Millman , Santa Monica
