Gov Jerry Brown Delivers a Blow to Affordable Housing Efforts That Will Leave Low Income Renters Out in the Cold
With the power of his pen the Governor essentially undermined the hard work of activists to get this key affordable housing bill passed by the state legislature and, thus, jeopardized the ability of local governments to provided affordable housing through inclusionary housing laws.
Inclusionary zoning is a land use practice through which local governments promote affordable housing. These policies have been in use for over 40 years, but were challenged in the case of Palmer/Sixth Street Properties L.P. v. City of Los Angeles.
In Palmer, the court held that the provision of the state Costa-Hawkins Act, which gives developers, and not government, the right to establish initial rental rates applies to privately financed rental housing projects and voids many inclusionary housing policies.
The California Association of Realtors and landlord groups sponsored the Costa-Hawkins law in 1995. It prohibits new construction of rental units from being subject to local rent control ordinances and really doesn’t have anything to do with inclusionary housing laws.
By introducing AB 1229, which would have allowed locally elected officials to decide whether to require, as a condition of approval, new market-rate rental housing developments in their communities to include a small percentage of units with rents affordable to low- and moderate-income tenants or pay an in lieu fee, Assembly Majority Leader Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) hoped the bill would have superseded the 2009 California Appellant court Palmer ruling that cities requiring developers to include housing priced below market rates were in violation of the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act.
A broad coalition of tenant groups, affordable housing advocates and non-profit community housing developers, supported the bill, as did most major newspapers around the state. As could be expected, big developers, mega-landlords and realtors went all out to fight the bill and leaned heavily on Governor Brown to veto it.
People can express their outrage by letting Governor Brown know how disappointed you are by his veto of this extremely important housing bill.
The statewide renters organization, Tenants’ Together, has provided an easy way to let the Governor know how you feel about his action. Just click here to send him a message.
CES on the Radio: Case of the Heartless Landlord Evicting a 73 Year Old Woman in Order to Jack Up the Rent
When the lady finally spoke to management, they gave her 3 days to send in the payment, and she promptly mailed a money order for the amount that was due.
The owner has reportedly admitted that he is driven by a desire to get more money for the apartment, since the woman has lived there for 40 years, and only has to pay $259 a month.
David Cruz spoke with Larry Gross, Executive Director of the Coalition for Economic Survival, about the woman’s rights as a tenant in a rent-controlled area.
June 18th Public Hearing Regarding LifeLine Reduced Rates for California Low-Income Mobile Phone Customers
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is holding a hearing on June 18th in Los Angeles to gather public input regarding whether there should be low cost LifeLine rates for wireless service for low income customers. Other hearings have been going on throughout the state since May 14th and will continue until August 13th.
The program will supplement existing Federal LifeLine programs, which provide phone services to low income individuals. But, there have been many barriers for very low-income people to access the discounted service. For instance, cell phone providers do not recognize Single Resident Occupancy (SRO) hotels as permanent residences. As a result, phone companies are denying Lifeline rates to SRO residents who are some of the most in need of affordable phone service. Others have had difficulty receiving their cell-phones because many different providers and third parties must rubber-stamp their application.
Even when consumers finally receive their cellphones, they report having little or no service in their rooms and have had to go outside to use their cell phones. Although Federal wireless LifeLine service providers have often advertised their service as free, customers have been particularly unsatisfied by the amount of monthly minutes.
The issue of allowable minutes and the cost of the plan are the crucial issues to ensure a meaningful cell phone LifeLine program for California’s low-income residents.
It is crucial that people attend this hearing to urge the CPUC to keep all customers connected by updating California’s LifeLine program to include mobile phones. The CPUC should adopt an effective LifeLine program that holds phone companies accountable for the subsidies they receive, and provides eligible consumers with phone service that will last all month, include unlimited texting and direct 911 access and provide family plans
LifeLine can help the homeless find homes, the jobless find jobs, the ill find medical care, the elderly get help in emergencies, parents stay in touch with children sand families to stay connected.
H E A R I N G I N F O R M A T I O N
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Hearings on Establishing a LifeLine Rate Program for Mobile Phone Service
TUESDAY, JUNE 18
4 pm to 7 pm
Caltrans District 7 Headquarters
100 South Main Street
(at 1st Street Across from LA City Hall)
Downtown Los Angeles
CES and LAFLA Join Together to Win Major Tenants’ Rights Legal Victory Against Sexual Harassment & Discrimination of Tenants Perpetrated by Building Managers
Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA) attorneys assisted low-income tenants in successfully fighting back against sexual harassment and discrimination perpetrated by building managers, securing a settlement late in March which delivers monetary compensation for the plaintiffs while ensuring protections for future tenants at the Lafayette Hotel, a rent-controlled residential building offering low rents in the Rampart area of Los Angeles. For nearly two years, senior attorney Fernando Gaytan (photo left), along with co-counsel Christopher Brancart, litigated a hard fought battle to end the harassment of female tenants at the Lafayette.
“Reports of landlords demanding ’sex for rent’ may seem shocking and uncommon to most people,” stated Gaytan, “but for poor and low income tenants, encounters with predatory landlords who take advantage of the economic and social barriers these tenants face is tragically much more common than reported.”
LAFLA’s housing unit launched an extensive investigation after several women from the building stepped forward and described the same pattern of repeated sexual harassment at the hands of management, employees and the owner of the residential hotel. Accounts of harassment included repeated taunting, groping, and quid pro quo in which the women were told their rent would be waived if they acquiesced to demands for sexual favors.
In response to the investigation, several former and current residents stepped forward as witnesses and described similar experiences. For the plaintiffs and several of the witnesses, the Lafayette was their first home after being emancipated from the foster care system or after a period of homelessness.
“Cases involving sexual harassment of tenants highlight how a severe lack of resources can leave tenants vulnerable to multiple forms of abuse by an unscrupulous landlord,” continued Gaytan. “Many low income tenants, especially those who recently left homelessness, are often prime targets of this type of unlawful conduct by landlords, managers and those with power to decide the fate of their homes.”
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of three women and the tenants’ rights group Coalition for Economic Survival, included claims based on violations of federal and state fair housing laws prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender. The parties reached a settlement just before a jury trial was to commence. As result, the court has entered a consent decree order which calls for monetary compensation, prevents one set of defendants from ever having any involvement with the Lafayette Hotel and requires owner Balubahai Patel to meet certain training and reporting requirements designed to enforce fair housing obligations.
Mr. Patel, who owns scores of residential properties throughout California, will be required to undergo sexual harassment training and obtain certification in fair housing obligations. He will also be required to demand such training of his employees involved in the operation of each residential property and institute a new written anti-harassment policy at his properties. Tenants of Mr. Patel’s properties must be given a copy of HUD-issued know-your-rights fliers concerning harassment and management must exhibit an informational poster on laws against harassment. Mr. Patel, whose business plan includes leasing his residential buildings to individuals who then act as landlord to the residents, must now also include in future leases a requirement that operators and their employees undergo fair housing training.
The court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the consent decree and defendants will be required to submit certificates of compliance to the court, a key provision, according to Gaytan. “The consent decree entered in this case is a tremendous benefit to the tenants of this building and will have a much broader impact. At each of the over thirty properties owned by the defendant, managers will be asked to provide tenants with informational fliers concerning sexual harassment and fair housing laws and will be required to complete sexual harassment training. This requirement imposed on the owner of multiple properties statewide will cause much needed ’know your rights’ information to reach hundreds of tenants who would otherwise remain isolated.”
Reprinted from “LAFLA Matters,” the newsletter of the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
Anti-Rent Control, Anti-Tenants’ Rights Forces Line Up Behind Wendy Greuel’s Bid for Los Angeles Mayor
It was nearly two month ago that the Coalition for Economic Survival (CES) expressed great concern over LA City Controller and Mayoral Candidate Wendy Greuel’s enthusiastic announcement about receiving the endorsement of the landlord group, Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA).
Those concerns has been increased with the announced on Monday that the Central City Association (CCA) has endorsed Wendy Greuel’s bid for Mayor.
The CCA is a business advocacy group that lobbies city and state government to grease the wheels for development in downtown. Besides landlords and developers, it also represents large corporations, such as Chevron, Walmart, Verizon, JP Morgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo and Bank of America.
The Central City Association has been a consistent opponent of tenants’ rights, rent control and restricting condo conversions that displaces tenants.
Some examples of CCA’s efforts include opposing a temporary rent freeze introduced by LA City Council Member Richard Alarcon that would have given the City Council time to debate potential amendments to the rent control ordinance without saddling LA tenants with more unjust rent increases.
CCA opposed LA City Council Member and Mayoral Candidate Eric Garcetti’s amendment to a local provision of the Ellis Act (state law prohibiting local jurisdictions from preventing landlords from going out of the rent business), which would require developers the choice of constructing a new, rent stabilized building (where rent control would extend to every new unit, regardless of size of demolished building), or replacing the lost rent stabilized units one for one with units that would be affordable to those making 80% of AMI or less, up to 20% of the total building units. It was a provision that CES strongly supported and was passed.
CCA opposed a moratorium on condo conversions and demolitions in Los Angeles. From 2001 to 2007 nearly 15,000 LA rent control units were lost due to condo conversions and demolitions to build new condos. City Council District 2, represented by Wendy Greuel at the time, had the third largest number of rent controlled units lost in the City.
“A moratorium sends absolutely the wrong message at absolutely the wrong time, because the condo market is slowing down significantly,” said Carol Schatz, who heads the CentralCity Association. “And while there may be some projects still in the pipeline, there aren’t that many. It scares investors anytime you talk about a moratorium, and let’s not forget that housing drives the L.A. economy.
CES Executive Director Larry Gross responded, “In other words, CCA was essentially saying when the condo market is hot, it is unfair to destroy pending investments by enacting a moratorium. When the market cools, it is unfair because it will deter the formation of new speculator groups seeking to profit by evicting tenants and eliminating rent-controlled housing.”
Gross observed that, “It appears that Greuel has been able to coalesce the forces that have been at the forefront of the fight to destroy rent control and undermine tenants’ rights behind her mayoral candidacy.”
Besides AAGLA and CCA, the Beverly Hills/Greater Los Angeles Association of Realtors Local PAC, the Los Angeles County Federation of Business (Biz Fed), the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce’s Jobs PAC, and the Valley Industry and Commerce Association (VICA) PAC are all supporting Greuel.
All these endorsements are based on the belief that Greuel will support them on issues of concern to them,” said Gross. “They clearly believe that Wendy Greuel would be a better Mayor for landlords and developers. This is a very important factor that tenants must keep in mind when they cast their ballots for Mayor on May 21, Election Day.”
In addition, homeless advocacy groups, such as LACAN, have been actively opposing the CCA’s “Downtown 2020″ plan, which they state calls for no affordable housing to be built in Downtown, and increased police and criminalization efforts against homeless and poor residents.
CCA was also a key opponent to labor unions and supporters efforts to extend the City’s living wage ordinance to hotels near LAX.
Late on March 18th, a Federal court judge ruled that the Federal Courts had no right to intercede in State court matters (“abstention” doctrine). Thus, the lawsuit filed on behalf of the Coalition for Economic Survival, People Organized for Westside Renewal, Union de Vecinos, the Independent Living Center of Southern California and several impacted individuals to stop the closure and consolidation of Los Angeles County Superior was thrown out.
The judge ruled purely on the issue of abstention. He felt strongly that this was an issue that should go to either State court or the Federal Court of Appeals. But, he did not rule on the merits of our case. As a result, there is strong determination by the attorneys and plaintiffs to continue on.
Our attorneys at the Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County, the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, the Western Center on Law and Poverty and the Disability Rights Legal Center are weighing the next step to take. But, there will, most certainly, be a next step!
The courts cannot be allowed to move forward with this court closure and consolidation policy. The impact would be devastating to poor people and people living with disabilities.
As reported in an earlier post (click here to read), we believe this action will also result in a significant increase in unjust and illegal evictions. The courts must not be allowed to slam the door of justice in the face of the people we all serve.
Lawsuit Filed to Stop L.A. County Court Closures That Will Likely Lead to More Unjust and Illegal Evictions
Los Angeles Superior Court’s closure of 21 of its 26 courtrooms for eviction hearings illegally “shuts the courthouse doors on many of the county’s most vulnerable residents” community organizers claim in a federal lawsuit, which CES is a plaintiff in.
The 26 courts where unlawful detainer cases were filed are being reduced to five courts in the downtown Stanley Mosk Courthouse, or in Pasadena, Long Beach, Santa Monica, or Antelope Valley.
In response, the Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County, the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, the Western Center on Law and Poverty, and the Disability Rights Legal Center are suing the Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of the Coalition for Economic Survival, People Organized for Westside Renewal, Union de Vecinos, the Independent Living Center of Southern California and several impacted individuals.
The lawsuit claims the state’s response to its judicial funding crisis violated the Fair Housing Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act, and the First and 14th Amendments.
Facing a $56 million to $85 million budget shortfall for the fiscal year, the closings will include 10 regional courthouses.
Unlawful detainers are filed when a tenant refuses to leave an apartment or leased property after receiving an eviction notice.
The complaint states: “The Court’s plan delivers a devastating blow to individuals with disabilities and violates its obligation to make courts accessible to people with disabilities. Yet, as the Court has acknowledged, it did not even consider the impact of its plan on tenants with disabilities.”
It also states, “The Court’s actions will force thousands of low-income Black, Latino and Asian tenants and tenants with disabilities to spend five hours or more traveling to distant courthouses and back, simply to have their day in court.”
At a March 14th news conference on the steps of the Los Angeles Federal Courthouse, where the lawsuit was filed, CES Executive Director Larry Gross stated, “Unfortunately, the unbalanced scales of justice are being further weighted against low income and working people with this outrageous plan of court house closures and consolidation.”
Joined by other organization plaintiffs and legal service organization attorneys, Gross further said that landlord will have greater incentives to now evict tenants even if there is no basis or legal justification, because chances become high that many of these tenants won’t respond to the eviction notice or will not show up for the hearing, because they have no way to get to court, thus will default and lose there eviction case.
Following the news conference, several blocks away in front of the downtown Stanley Mosk LA County Superior Courthouse, hundreds of others packed the street to protest the court closures. The demonstration was organized by the Service Employees International Union, the ACLU/Southern California and others.