JOIN THE CAMPAIGN TO SAVE RENT CONTROL

YES on The Homeowners Protection Act

More than two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that government
can use eminent domain to take a home to give to a private developer.
Since that outrageous decision, more than 40 states have reformed their
eminent domain laws, but California has failed to act.

• The Homeowners Protection Act will prohibit the government from
using eminent domain to take a home to transfer to a private developer.


NO on the Hidden Agendas Scheme

It Would Abolish Rent Control, Stop Water Infrastructure Projects, and Destroy Land-Use Planning

Wealthy landlords are collecting signatures to put a measure on the June ‘08 ballot
for their own financial gain. These landlords want you to believe that the so-called
California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act (CPOFPA) - dubbed the
"Hidden Agendas Scheme" - is about eminent domain, but the measure is really an attempt
to abolish rent control and other renter protections. To make matters worse,
the measure also contains poorly drafted provisions that could stop future water
projects, destroy local land-use planning and erode environmental protections.


The Hidden Agendas Scheme would:

* Eliminate rent control and other renter protection laws.
* Threaten water quality and supply.
* Hurt the environment and stop regulations that protect our neighborhoods.
* Lead to thousands of frivolous lawsuits and paralyze approval of new homes, businesses and other community projects.

Find out how you can help. Go to:

http://www.eminentdomainreform.com/
and

http://www.rentersrights.blogspot.com/

 

Lincoln Place Tenants Win in Court
Evictions Halted!!!!! Evicted Tenant Might Move Back
20 Years of Struggle Pays Off....For Now

Lincoln Place Tenants scored a major victory when the California Court of Appeals sided with tenants, ruling that the pending evictions were unlawful and violated the terms of conditions imposed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in connection with a redevelopment project the city approved in November, 2002.

Lincoln Place was a 795-unit rent controlled complex in Venice. Some of the building have been demolished. The ruling is a huge blow to the owners of the complex, AIMCO, which is the largest landlord of private and HUD subsidized housing in the nation. AIMCO wants to redevelop the property with high-priced luxury townhouses.

Lincoln Place tenants were first faced with eviction 20 years ago when the Coalition for Economic Survival (CES) helped tenants organize a tenant association to stop the landlord at that time from using a loophole in the rent control to eviction tenants and jack up rents.

That tenant association has stayed together and fought off numerous other attempts to eviction tenants under the tenacious and committed leadership of Sheila Bernard, the association President, Frieda Marlin, Laura Burns, Jan Book, Ingrid Mueller, Amanda Seward and many, many others.

Lincoln Place tenants have been loyal supporters and members of CES, having been key participants in many of our citywide efforts to protect rent control and oppose condo conversions and demolitions.

This court decisions could have major implications on supporting efforts to win further protects for tenants throughout the city facing condo conversions and demolitions.

 

LOS ANGELES TIMES
 

Court victory for tenants in a long battle
The few remaining residents can stay in their rent-controlled units at a Venice complex a firm is seeking to redevelop.
 

By Jessica Garrison, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
 

Friday, September 21, 2007

In the latest twist in one of Los Angeles' longest-running battles over gentrification, a state appellate court has ruled that tenants of an apartment complex slated for redevelopment can stay in their rent-controlled units.

A three-judge panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal also chastised the city for failing to intervene in the fight over the Lincoln Place apartments in Venice.

The decision was cheered by tenant advocates across the city. Over the last two decades, the fate of the complex's residents has become, for many, symbolic of people with lesser means trying to stay in rent-stabilized apartments in rapidly gentrifying areas.

"I'm ecstatic," said Laura Burns, a 59-year-old filmmaker who was removed from her Lincoln Place apartment by sheriff's deputies two years ago. "We have said since the very beginning that these evictions were not legal and that the city had the duty to enforce these conditions, and nobody would listen to us."

It was unclear whether the city and the developer, AIMCO-Venezia LLC, would appeal. Attorneys for the company did not return phone calls. A spokesman for City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo said lawyers were "still studying the ruling."

Completed in 1951, the 795 garden units a mile from the beach were hailed as a stylish example of post-World War II affordable housing. Only 13 apartments remain occupied in the complex.

The battle over the apartments began in 1991, when a new owner applied for permission to demolish the buildings and replace them with condominiums.

Los Angeles officials initially denied permission to demolish. But in 2002, after the city lost a court battle, officials approved the project.

As part of the approval, the owners of Lincoln Place agreed to a redevelopment plan that gave the tenants the option to move to other units within the complex if their apartments were demolished.

But when AIMCO-Venezia bought the 38-acre property outright in 2003, the company said it did not have to comply with those conditions and started razing buildings. Preservationists who considered the complex of historical importance -- it was one of the rare projects for that era designed by a black architect -- filed suit.

In 2006, Councilman Bill Rosendahl, whose district includes the complex, proposed having the city enforce the agreement signed by the previous owner.

The city attorney told the council, before it rejected Rosendahl's proposal, that it would not be enforceable and would expose the city to liability.

Rebuffed by that decision, the tenants sued.

A trial judge ruled in the city's favor, but the Court of Appeal took a different view.

The city's arguments "find no support in this record or in the law," the justices wrote.

That caused Rosendahl to question the legal advice that the council had received.

"I look forward to the city attorney's office's explanation," he said in an interview Thursday. "And frankly, I wouldn't mind an apology."

The ruling left a variety of questions unanswered, among them what will happen to the tenants who have already been evicted.

John Murdock, the tenants' attorney, said people who were evicted could seek their apartments back -- along with money for emotional distress.

 Quick Facts About AIMCO's Evictions
and the Tenants' Struggle to Save Lincoln Place
(Information taken from the Lincoln Place web site at www.lincolnplace.net)

* AIMCO, the largest owner of apartment buildings in the U.S., acquired full ownership of Lincoln Place Apartments in 2003. Since 2001, it had 50% ownership of the complex. As property values in Los Angeles skyrocketed during this time, AIMCO desired to redevelop the rent-controlled complex to make market-rate profits.

* In 2002, AIMCO volunteered to build 144 rental units in exchange for a density bonus (which would let them build units at a higher density than normally allowed) and the right to build 706 new condos. The City of Los Angeles granted AIMCO the redevelopment plan on the condition that "no tenant would be evicted."

* In March 2005, AIMCO filed Ellis Act eviction notices on more than 300 tenants claiming AIMCO was going out of the rental business, even though AIMCO's charter limits their business to renting apartments only.

* In July 2005, the Court of Appeals ruled that AIMCO violated the conditions of the redevelopment plan when AIMCO demolished five Lincoln Place buildings on Lake Street in 2003; whether or not the Tract Map (redevelopment plan) was recorded, AIMCO must now comply with its conditions, or have public hearings to modify it.

* In November 2005, AIMCO unilaterally broke off negotiations for a settlement with the tenants regarding the evictions when the California State Historic Commission found Lincoln Place eligible for the State Historical Register. AIMCO later took steps to sue the Commission for its decision.

* In December 2005, AIMCO evicted 80 households, including 59 households locked out by the L.A. sheriff, in violation of their previous promise that no tenant would be evicted.

* In April 2006, Lincoln Place tenants, the community, local preservationists, the City of Los Angeles, and AIMCO entered into mediated settlement negotiations, but AIMCO again unilaterally broke off the negotiations on May 5, 2006 when the State Historic Commissioners restored historic designation on Lincoln Place, which AIMCO had challenged.

* In violation of the 2005 Court of Appeals decision, the Los Angeles City Attorney refused to stop these evictions until AIMCO applies for a demolition permit, which will happen only after the property is emptied of tenants.

 

Coalition for Economic Survival (CES) ACTION ALERT!!! RENT CONTROL LOOPHOLE CLOSED

With a City Council Chamber packed on one side with high-priced landlord and developer lobbyists and representatives in expensive tailor-made suits and with the other side filled with tenants and tenant advocates from Call to Action, an alliance of L.A.'s major tenants' rights organizations including CES, many in brightly colored t-shirts proudly displaying their organization's name, the L.A. City Council unanimously approved a long overdue law to close a rent control loophole.

The loophole enabled developers and landlords to evict tenants and destroy affordable housing.

State law guarantees landlords the right to go out of the rental business. When doing so a landlord signs a legal declaration attesting to this fact. If the landlord then demolishes the apartment building and constructs new rental housing they've made a fraudulent claim.

This new law, passed by the City Council, helps to ensure these landlords and developers are not rewarded, and that tenants and affordable housing are protected.

WHAT THE NEW LAW DOES
The ordinance would require a landlord/developer who demolished a rent controlled building and constructs new rental units on the site to be subject to the following:

1) All the units in the new building would be covered by the Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO). The new law will allow building owners to set the initial rents at market rates, but future increases would be subject to the city's rent control law, which limits how much rents can be raised each year and tenants will have just cause eviction protections.

2) The owner would have the alternative option to replace an equal number of housing units that were demolished, not to exceed 20% of the total number of newly constructed rental units, that would be affordable to households with an income at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) established by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, which shall remain affordable for at least 30 years. The additional units would then be exempted from rent control.

THE DEBATE
At the City Council hearing the previous week, L.A. Housing Department General Manager Mercedes Marquez brilliantly deflected questions from Council Member Bernard Parks, a vocal rent control opponent, stating that this law was needed, especially in light of Forbes Magazine recently reporting that Los Angeles was the city with the nation's least affordable housing and that only 2% of L.A.'s residents can now afford to buy a home indicating a crisis that is now not only limited to low income people, but now severely affects middle class Angelenos.

Dismissing charges that this law would stop the development of needed new rental housing, Marquez responded that L.A. ranks only behind Dallas, nationally, in the construction of new rental housing.

Enormous thanks should be given to Council Members Eric Garcetti and Ed Reyes, who, both, provided effective leadership on this issue. In addition, thanks goes out to Council Members Wendy Greuel, Bill Rosendahl and Janice Hahn for providing strong vocal support.

Nevertheless, much more City action is needed to truly preserve the city's scarce existing affordable housing stock, as well as to produce additional housing to meet L.A.'s ever increasing need. Thus, the fight continues...................
 

 

SUBSTANTIAL TENANT RELOCATION

ASSISTANCE INCREASE VICTORY!!!!!

But, the Campaign to Win Restrictions on
Condo Conversions & Rental Housing Demolitions
Continues...........................................

WHAT WE WON!

After another 2 hours of public testimony and City Council debate the City Council finally adopted an increase in tenants relocation benefits and a number of other proposals to attempt to deal the condo conversions and demolitions sweeping across our city, displacing a mass number of tenants from their homes.

While we believe this big increase relocation will benefit tenants, it is still not enough and clearly must not be seen as the end all answer. We still need the City Council to concretely restriction condo conversions, curb demolitions and stop the evictions. Nevertheless, we achieved a significant number of victories, yesterday.

Here is what we were able to get changed:

- The tenancy requirements, to receive the higher relocation amounts, was lowered to 3 years from 5 years.

- The means testing to determine whether a low-income tenants meets the financial criteria to receive the high relocation amounts will not be effective until the LA Housing Department has established it administrative procedures to oversee the means testing. Until that time all low income tenants will receive the higher relocation amounts.

- The means testing provision will sunset after one year unless the City Council votes to extend it. If the provision sunsets they will be no means testing, nor tenancy requirements, thus all tenants will receive the higher relocation amounts.

- The effective date to receive the higher relocation assistance is April 11, 2007. The means that every tenant that receives an eviction notice dated from yesterday on gets the higher amounts.

The new fee structure is:

--$6,810 to tenants who have lived in their apartments less than three years (or $14,850 for those who are older, disabled or have minor children).

--$9,040 to tenants who have lived in their apartments more than three years (or $17,080 for those older, disabled or with minor children).

--From $9,040 to $17,080 to tenants whose income is 80% or below the area's median income--$55,450 for a family of four, regardless of the length of tenancy.

Also in the report adopted by the City Council are proposals to do the following:

= Requires building owners to provide relocation assistance payments to tenants who voluntarily move out of a unit proposed for condominium conversion. Tenants who voluntarily move after approval of the map and before notice of termination are entitled to relocation assistance,

= Establishes landlord fees for the purpose of providing relocation assistance by the City's Relocation Assistance Service Provider.

= Provides for an increase in the Rental Housing Production Fee from $500 to $1,492.

= Establishes a compliance monitoring program to monitor compliance with tenant relocation assistance requirements when buildings are demolished.

= Provides for a fee of $186 per rental unit for resolution of income disputes.

In Addition the City Council Voted to:

INSTRUCT the City Attorney's office, in coordination with the Planning Department and the Department of Building and Safety, to draft an Ordinance within 45 days allowing the Department of Building and Safety the ability to deny a demolition permit if: (a) the vacancy rate is less than five percent; and (b) the cumulative effect on the rental market is significant.

INSTRUCT the Planning Department and the LAHD to utilize the actual cost of replacing a unit and other key factors as a basis for formulating a revised Rental Housing Production Fee Increase as part of a nexus study; and to report back to the Planning and Land Use Management Committee in 45 days with findings and recommendations. The report back should include the anticipated impact of the fees, and an analysis on what other cities have done.

INSTRUCT the Planning Department, Advisory Agency, to adopt a new department procedure for implementation relative to the Findings on Vacancy Rate  and Cumulative Impacts, pursuant to LAMC Section 12.95.2(f) and revised application procedures for residential condominium conversions (as shown on both Attachments A and B of this joint Committee report); and report back to the Planning and Land Use Management Committee on its plan to enforce the new procedure.

INSTRUCT the Planning Department, Advisory Agency, to report back in 60 days to the Planning and Land Use Management and Housing, Community and Economic Development Committees on recommendations from the economic study for implementation of a long-term approach, pursuant to LAMC Section 12.95.2(f) with respect to condominium conversions and demolition/new condominium construction cases.

INSTRUCT the Planning Department, Advisory Agency, to prepare and post on its website a bi-weekly listing of approvals and denials on condominium conversions and demolition applications.

INSTRUCT the Planning Department to invite representatives of jurisdictions which have enacted an annual cap on the number of permissible condominium conversions to participate on the suggested panel of experts. The expert panel shall address the ramifications of creating an annual cap on not only condominium conversions but also demolitions.

INSTRUCT the Planning Department, LAHD, and City Attorney to report back in two weeks to the Planning and Land Use Management and Housing, Community and Economic Development Committees on the status of a previous August, 2006, request on the feasibility of amending the LAMC to require applicants to provide long-term lease guarantees.

INSTRUCT the Planning Department, LAHD, and City Attorney to summarize the various policy directives related to addressing condominium conversions, demolitions and new constructions, and milestones and timelines; and to provide weekly status updates to the Planning and Land Use Management Committee.

INSTRUCT the Housing Department to report back to the Planning and Land Use Management and Housing, Community and Economic Development Committees' with any policy changes or required changes to the Rent Stabilization Ordinance regarding discrimination matters.


YOUR ACTION STILL NEEDED!!!

We must make sure the City Council knows that their job is not complete. While increasing relocation assistance may ease some pain, it does not cure the disease -- that of the widespread destruction of affordable housing and the mass displacement of tenants.

Continue to contact LA City Council Members and urge that they quickly move to develop and adopt measures to restrict condo conversion and demolitions.

Write & Mail to: LA City Councilmember __________________
LA City Hall – Room ____________
200 N. Spring Street,  Los Angeles, CA 90012

Email & Call:
Los Angeles City Council Members

DISTRICT       COUNCILMEMBER       TELEPHONE      ROOM   EMAIL

1st                     ED P. REYES                   213- 485-3451     410        councilmember.reyes@lacity.org
2nd                   WENDY GREUEL           213-473-7002      475        councilmember.greuel@lacity.org
3rd                    DENNIS P. ZINE             213-473-7003      450       councilmember.zine@lacity.org
4th                    TOM LABONGE             213-485-3337      480        labonge@lacity.org
5th                    JACK WEISS                  213-473-7005       440       councilmember.weiss@lacity.org
6th                    TONY CARDENAS       213-473-7006       455        councilman.cardenas@lacity.org
7th                    RICHARD ALARCON   213-847-7777       425      councilmember.alarcon@lacity.org
8th                    BERNARD PARKS       213-473-7008        460        councilmember.parks@lacity.org
9th                    JAN PERRY                   213-473-7009       420         councilmember.perry@lacity.org
10th                  HERB WESSON, JR.      213-473-7010      430         councilmember.wesson@lacity.org
11th                  BILL ROSENDAHL       213-485-3811       415         councilman.rosendahl@lacity.org
12th                  GREIG SMITH                213-485-3343      405          councilmember.smith@lacity.org
13th                  ERIC GARCETTI            213-473-7013      470          councilmember.garcetti@lacity.org
14th                  JOSE HUIZAR                213-485-3335       465         councilmember.huizar@lacity.org
15th                  JANICE HAHN              213-473-7015       435         councilmember.hahn@lacity.org

 

information.

Article date
Click to enter the date and a brief description of this news article or press release. You may want to include an excerpt from the article or a sentence or two about the publication in which the story appeared. To link the article title to another web site or document, select the title and click the "Link" button in your editing toolbar.