Last week, a California Appellate court took a giant step toward eliminating affordable rental housing in communities across California. In Palmer/Sixth Street Properties v. City of Los Angeles, the Court ruled that a Los Angeles inclusionary housing law was preempted by the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. As a result of this decision, inclusionary housing laws across the state are in jeopardy of being tossed out by over-zealous judges.
There has been virtually no coverage of this Court ruling, perhaps in part because the decision is cloaked in legalese that does not make for riveting news headlines. But behind the legalese is one undeniable fact: three judges on the Court of Appeal have rewritten California law, and jeopardized the development of affordable rental housing across the state. This decision must be reversed, and it had better happen quick.
Check out the full story here.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Partnering with Predatory Landlords Part 2
Last week, we wrote a post about a meeting in East Palo Alto to discuss whether or not area nonprofits should be accepting money from notorious predatory landlord, Page Mill Properties.
This week we had opportunity to attend the meeting. It was very well attended with over a dozen local nonprofits represented as well as the office of San Mateo County Supervisor Rose Jacob Gibson.
The meeting and discussion was facilitated by Dr. Faye McNair-Knox the Executive Director of One East Palo Alto and Chief Financial Officer of Community Wireless. Community Wireless (CW) is a nonprofit with the mission of bringing community-wide wireless broadband to East Palo Alto.
Several months ago Page Mill Properties approached CW about creating a "partnership" in which Page Mill would give access to roof space for wireless internet base station, a few thousand dollars for equipment, and $15oo per year for operating costs. As part of the deal Page Mill would publicize the agreement as philanthropic for PR purposes. Before agreeing to the partnership, CW decided to hold a meeting to gain input from other organizations from the community on whether or not it was a good idea to partner with Page Mill Properties.
Though everyone in the room understood the great importance of bridging the digital divide and providing broadband service for all East Palo Alto residents, the majority sentiment was clearly that there had to be a better way to achieve CW's goals than by partnering with Page Mill Properties.
Chris Lund and Matthew Fremont from the Fair Rent Coalition provided detailed evidence of Page Mill's mass evictions and explained that Page Mill's intentions for it's holdings in East Palo Alto had no place for affordable housing.
Organizers for Youth United for Community Action (YUCA) said they believed that what Page Mill was doing was actually not at all philanthropic, but a rather a savvy business decision and that Page Mill would be using the wireless access in their properties as yet another excuse for excessive rent increases.
CW promised to take the community concerns into account before making their decision.
This week we had opportunity to attend the meeting. It was very well attended with over a dozen local nonprofits represented as well as the office of San Mateo County Supervisor Rose Jacob Gibson.
The meeting and discussion was facilitated by Dr. Faye McNair-Knox the Executive Director of One East Palo Alto and Chief Financial Officer of Community Wireless. Community Wireless (CW) is a nonprofit with the mission of bringing community-wide wireless broadband to East Palo Alto.
Several months ago Page Mill Properties approached CW about creating a "partnership" in which Page Mill would give access to roof space for wireless internet base station, a few thousand dollars for equipment, and $15oo per year for operating costs. As part of the deal Page Mill would publicize the agreement as philanthropic for PR purposes. Before agreeing to the partnership, CW decided to hold a meeting to gain input from other organizations from the community on whether or not it was a good idea to partner with Page Mill Properties.
Though everyone in the room understood the great importance of bridging the digital divide and providing broadband service for all East Palo Alto residents, the majority sentiment was clearly that there had to be a better way to achieve CW's goals than by partnering with Page Mill Properties.
Chris Lund and Matthew Fremont from the Fair Rent Coalition provided detailed evidence of Page Mill's mass evictions and explained that Page Mill's intentions for it's holdings in East Palo Alto had no place for affordable housing.
Organizers for Youth United for Community Action (YUCA) said they believed that what Page Mill was doing was actually not at all philanthropic, but a rather a savvy business decision and that Page Mill would be using the wireless access in their properties as yet another excuse for excessive rent increases.
CW promised to take the community concerns into account before making their decision.
Friday, July 17, 2009
City Attorney Lets Bank Off Easy in Oakland Eviction Case
Responding to pattern of banks and real estate agents violating Oakland's Just Cause for Eviction law, Oakland City Attorney John Russo took an important step when he sued JP Morgan Chase and other banks and real estate agents for illegally evicting Oakland tenants after foreclosure. For this he has received a great deal of well-deserved media attention and praise from tenant advocates.
But Russo's recent settlement with JP Morgan Chase is a major disappointment. The settlement calls for payment of a mere $35,000 by JP Morgan Chase to the city. This settlement cannot even be considered a slap on the wrist.
In his press release, Russo “congratulate[s] JP Morgan Chase and the other defendants for quickly stepping up" to settle the lawsuit. He adds that he hopes the settlement "send[s] a strong message to other banks and agents who do business in our community."
We seriously doubt that a huge bank like JP Morgan Chase, who this week announced its second quarter profit of $2.7 billion, will alter its conduct because of a $35,000 settlement with the City of Oakland. The settlement does not even include a stipulated injunction requiring compliance with the law or penalties for future violations.
Two real estate agents who were defendants in the same case also agreed to settle. Russo’s “praised the real estate agents” for agreeing to the settlements. Percy Cheung agreed to pay the city $2,500. Joseph McNulty agreed to pay $3,000. Realtors who are profiting by violating tenants rights won’t be deterred by these underwhelming figures.
That said, at least the agreements with the real estate agents contain nonmonetary relief that could help deter future misconduct. The Cheung settlement contains a stipulated injunction. Both the Cheung and McNulty settlement require the agents to produce a broad range of specified documents to the city which may help in the prosecution of other defendants. Both real estate agents also agreed to pay the City $5000 per violation in the event of any future violations. Similar provisions should have been included in the settlement with the bank.
Fortunately, this is not the only case pending against realtors and banks that violated Oakland tenant protection laws. There are four other lawsuits pending. According to the City’s press release, "[t]he City Attorney's Office is in settlement negotiations with other defendants named in the complaints."
Russo has an opportunity to make sure that any settlements in the other cases reflect the gravity of the violations and send a real message to deter future illegal conduct by banks and real estate agents. If banks and agents won’t agree to that type of settlement, the City should take the cases to trial and conduct full discovery of the bad practices of these banks and agents.
We also hope to see a different tone in any further press releases from the City in these cases. The defendant banks and agents are accused of serious violations of Oakland's Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance. Imagine a D.A. publicly praising a criminal defendant for agreeing to a plea bargain – it wouldn’t happen. And here, defendants aren’t even admitting they did anything wrong, instead signing an agreement in which they “do not admit any violation of law.” There is simply no good reason for the City Attorney to issue a press release praising real estate agents and banks for agreeing to this type of settlement.
Tenants in Oakland and beyond are watching these important cases, as are banks and real estate agents across the state and the country. The recent settlement sends exactly the wrong message.
But Russo's recent settlement with JP Morgan Chase is a major disappointment. The settlement calls for payment of a mere $35,000 by JP Morgan Chase to the city. This settlement cannot even be considered a slap on the wrist.
In his press release, Russo “congratulate[s] JP Morgan Chase and the other defendants for quickly stepping up" to settle the lawsuit. He adds that he hopes the settlement "send[s] a strong message to other banks and agents who do business in our community."
We seriously doubt that a huge bank like JP Morgan Chase, who this week announced its second quarter profit of $2.7 billion, will alter its conduct because of a $35,000 settlement with the City of Oakland. The settlement does not even include a stipulated injunction requiring compliance with the law or penalties for future violations.
Two real estate agents who were defendants in the same case also agreed to settle. Russo’s “praised the real estate agents” for agreeing to the settlements. Percy Cheung agreed to pay the city $2,500. Joseph McNulty agreed to pay $3,000. Realtors who are profiting by violating tenants rights won’t be deterred by these underwhelming figures.
That said, at least the agreements with the real estate agents contain nonmonetary relief that could help deter future misconduct. The Cheung settlement contains a stipulated injunction. Both the Cheung and McNulty settlement require the agents to produce a broad range of specified documents to the city which may help in the prosecution of other defendants. Both real estate agents also agreed to pay the City $5000 per violation in the event of any future violations. Similar provisions should have been included in the settlement with the bank.
Fortunately, this is not the only case pending against realtors and banks that violated Oakland tenant protection laws. There are four other lawsuits pending. According to the City’s press release, "[t]he City Attorney's Office is in settlement negotiations with other defendants named in the complaints."
Russo has an opportunity to make sure that any settlements in the other cases reflect the gravity of the violations and send a real message to deter future illegal conduct by banks and real estate agents. If banks and agents won’t agree to that type of settlement, the City should take the cases to trial and conduct full discovery of the bad practices of these banks and agents.
We also hope to see a different tone in any further press releases from the City in these cases. The defendant banks and agents are accused of serious violations of Oakland's Just Cause for Eviction Ordinance. Imagine a D.A. publicly praising a criminal defendant for agreeing to a plea bargain – it wouldn’t happen. And here, defendants aren’t even admitting they did anything wrong, instead signing an agreement in which they “do not admit any violation of law.” There is simply no good reason for the City Attorney to issue a press release praising real estate agents and banks for agreeing to this type of settlement.
Tenants in Oakland and beyond are watching these important cases, as are banks and real estate agents across the state and the country. The recent settlement sends exactly the wrong message.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Bad Landlords Buy Positive PR by Partnering with Community Organizations
This week at Tenants Together we learned of a community meeting soon to be held in East Palo Alto titled "Page Mill Properties and Local Nonprofits: Is Partnering Worth It?" hosted by One East Palo Alto (OEPA). The goal of the meeting is to have a discussion about whether or not community organizations should be accepting money from Page Mill Properties. Page Mill Properties is, of course, the notorious landlord that has bought up more that 50% of the city's rent controlled housing and has been systematically undermining the EPA rent control ordinance.
According to Matthew Fremont of the EPA's Fair Rent Coalition, over 1500 residents have been displaced due to Page Mill's evictions and steep rent increases in the past year and a half, with another 5000 more residents currently at risk. Not surprisingly, Page Mill's outrageous conduct has earned them a great deal of negative press and ill will within the East Palo Alto community.
In an apparent attempt to gain positive public relations, Page Mill Properties has given money to local noprofits and then widely publicized these donations with press releases, YouTube videos, etc. But does giving a few thousand dollars to a local organization, no matter how worthy the work of the organization, make up for the mass displacement of innocent tenants?
Re'anita Burns of Youth United for Community Action and EPA-based nonprofit asks, "Why should we partner with Page Mill when they're so negatively affecting the majority of their residents?"
According to Matthew Fremont of the EPA's Fair Rent Coalition, over 1500 residents have been displaced due to Page Mill's evictions and steep rent increases in the past year and a half, with another 5000 more residents currently at risk. Not surprisingly, Page Mill's outrageous conduct has earned them a great deal of negative press and ill will within the East Palo Alto community.
In an apparent attempt to gain positive public relations, Page Mill Properties has given money to local noprofits and then widely publicized these donations with press releases, YouTube videos, etc. But does giving a few thousand dollars to a local organization, no matter how worthy the work of the organization, make up for the mass displacement of innocent tenants?
Re'anita Burns of Youth United for Community Action and EPA-based nonprofit asks, "Why should we partner with Page Mill when they're so negatively affecting the majority of their residents?"
"If Page Mill's goal is truly philanthropic, why not give anonymously? They're spreading money around to organizations but meanwhile they're showing their true colors with their excessive rent hikes and unfair evictions," says Chris Lund of the Fair Rent Coalition. "What they've done to the west side of the city, is simply tearing this community apart."
Page Mill isn't the first notorious landlord to use this transparent technique to buy positive PR. CitiApartments in San Francisco which bought up some 150 rental buildings in San Francisco and then became widely loathed for it's harrassment and mass eviction of tenants, announced in 2006 that it would rent three apartments at a cost of a dollar per year to "battle homelessness."
But as Tommi Avicolli Mecca a tenant counselor at the Housing Rights Committee points out, "while they were making this PR gesture, they were forcing out long term tenants including some of the community's most vulnerable residents including seniors, and folks with HIV AIDS."
In 2006, CitiApartments also supported One Warm Coat, "a non-profit organization which seeks to provide warmth to San Francisco residents in need. . . an easy and convenient way to provide any person in need with a warm coat, free of charge." Apparently the irony was lost on the PR team at CitiApartments that some of the recipients of those warm coats just may have been forced into the cold streets by the landlord's ruthless practices.
With funding for nonprofits becoming increasingly scarce, it must be tempting for organizations to consider taking money from almost any company willing to fund their worthy projects. However when these companies may be causing far more damage to the community then they can possibly make up for by assisting a few local organizations -- is, as the meeting title asks, the partnering worth it?
**************
For folks interested in attending the meeting in East Palo Alto here are the details:
Page Mill Properties and Local Nonprofits: Is Partnering Worth It?
Monday, July 27, 2009, 11:30am - 1:00pm
OEPA's Office/Ravenswood Family Health Center/California Room
1798-B Bay Road, East Palo Alto, CA
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Tenants Together featured in KQED's California Report
Rachel Myrow of KQED radio reports on how the foreclosure crisis is affecting tenants. Included is an interview with our Director Dean Preston.
http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R906110850/b
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)