By Dean Preston
Earlier today, an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out a challenge to the City of Goleta’s mobilehome rent control ordinance. This closely watched case is a major victory for mobilehome residents and rent control.
Tenants Together, National Housing Law Project and other allies had submitted an amicus brief in support of the City of Goleta.
The Ninth Circuit panel squarely rejected the park owners' argument that the rent control law somehow denied them their "investment backed expectation." The court found that the owners knew exactly what they were buying – a property subject to rent control -- and could not now challenge the rent control law as a taking. The court also noted that "the people who really do have investment-backed expectations that might be upset by changes in the rent control system are tenants who bought their mobile homes after rent control went into effect. Ending rent control would be a windfall to the Guggenheims, and a disaster for tenants who bought their mobile homes after rent control was imposed in the 70’s and 80’s."
Speculators like the Guggenheims routinely buy property cheap because of rent control and then turn around and try to invalidate rent control laws claiming that these laws deny them their ‘investment backed expectations’. The court's opinion will make it far more difficult for speculators to use these disingenuous arguments in the future.
Today's decision reverses Judge Jay S. Bybee’s decision from last year. In that decision, Bybee wrote that mobilehome park owners had a constitutional right to compensation by the City because the rent control ordinance constituted a “regulatory taking” under the Fifth Amendment. Despite the fact that the park owner bought the park with full knowledge of the rent control law, Judge Bybee, joined by Nixon-appointee Judge Alfred T. Goodwin, found that the law improperly interfered with the park owner’s “investment backed expectation.”
Judge Bybee, of course, was controversial long before his poorly reasoned anti-rent control decision. Bybee authored the torture memos while at the Office of Legal Counsel under George W. Bush, after which he was appointed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. When his responsibility for the torture memos was exposed, there were widespread calls for his impeachment. In April, 2009, The New York Times called for Bybee’s impeachment, stating: "These memos make it clear that Mr. Bybee is unfit for a job that requires legal judgment and a respect for the Constitution." Bybee was not impeached and remains on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Bybee’s Goleta ruling angered many advocates for renters’ rights who saw the court bending over backwards and contorting the law to find in favor of park owners and against those protected by rent control.
Today's en banc decision is an encouraging sign that the Ninth Circuit recognizes the right of cities to adopt and enforce their rent control laws, even if conservative activist judges like Judge Bybee do not.
As a result, many working families and seniors in Goleta and beyond will rest a little easier this holiday season.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Friday, December 10, 2010
Parkmerced tenants turn out to oppose demolition of rent controlled homes
By Dean Preston
Hundreds of tenants showed up at the Planning Commission last night to speak out against the proposed demolition of over 1500 rent controlled homes in San Francisco's Parkmerced. The hearing began with a contentious exchange between Commission President Ron Miguel and tenants of the property. Residents, many of whom have endured hours of waiting for public comment at prior hearings, demanded that Miguel give the public the opportunity to speak at the beginning of the hearing, rather than after a extensive staff presentation. Miguel ultimately relented, allowing public comment and rescheduling the staff presentation.
Over three hours of public comment followed. Virtually every speaker spoke against the project. The speakers included tenants who had lived at Parkmerced for decades.
Speakers from the Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods spoke near the end. They explained how the developer had presented the plan to their group and had stated that there was not much opposition among Parkmerced residents. They were moved by the public testimony, noting that there was clearly extensive opposition in the community.
Parkmerced is owned by private equity groups that would have the right to sell the complex to the highest bidder once entitlements are obtained. The same ownership group has financed schemes to displace tenants and redevelop rent controlled housing in New York City. These projects ultimately failed due to tenant opposition and financing problems, raising concerns about the financial viability of the massive development project at Parkmerced.
Under the proposal, over 1500 rent controlled "garden apartments" would be demolished. The construction would extend for decades (up to 30 years of construction), creating an environment that would be miserable for the thousands of residents of Parkmerced, many of whom are very long term tenants. The developer claims that tenants would be relocated to new rent controlled units, but serious question exist as to whether such promises are enforceable in light of state law and recent court rulings.
One thing is clear from the hearing. At long last, tenants at Parkmerced are coming together with each other and community allies to stop this project. They are doing so just in time. The Planning Commission will soon decide whether the massive project will proceed.
Details of the Development Agreement, including rent control and relocation issues, will be presented by Planning Department staff at the Planning Commissions meeting next week. For meeting and agenda information, visit www.sfplanning.org.
If the Planning Commission approves the project, residents could appeal to the Board of Supervisors. Commissioner Sugaya spoke after the public testimony, noting that in the end, "it is a political process" and community members should organize and go to their supervisors.
The Planning Commission deserves credit for having this hearing at San Francisco State University, located right next to Parkmerced. This was highly unusual and allowed many tenants -- including seniors and persons with disabilities -- who may not have been able to come to City Hall the opportunity to participate. The Commission should consider hosting future key meetings concerning the project at the same location given that Parkmerced is so far from City Hall.
Notably absent from the meeting were any politicians. The District's supervisor, Sean Elsbernd, was not present and has been largely silent about this massive redevelopment project proposed in his district. Despite the large number of tenants affected and the city wide implications of the proposed project, not a single mayoral candidate attended the hearing. Expect this to change as the rest of the city realizes the importance of this fight. In the meantime, Supervisors should be urged to tune in to SFGTV this evening at 8:15 to watch the powerful testimony against this project.
Tenants Together opposes the demolition of over 1500 rent controlled homes, particularly given the inadequate tenant protections. Until state law changes to guarantee that demolished rent controlled housing can be replaced with new rent controlled housing, it is hard to see how responsible city officials could approve such a project.
If you are interested in learning more or getting involved, please email info@tenantstogether.org.
Hundreds of tenants showed up at the Planning Commission last night to speak out against the proposed demolition of over 1500 rent controlled homes in San Francisco's Parkmerced. The hearing began with a contentious exchange between Commission President Ron Miguel and tenants of the property. Residents, many of whom have endured hours of waiting for public comment at prior hearings, demanded that Miguel give the public the opportunity to speak at the beginning of the hearing, rather than after a extensive staff presentation. Miguel ultimately relented, allowing public comment and rescheduling the staff presentation.
Over three hours of public comment followed. Virtually every speaker spoke against the project. The speakers included tenants who had lived at Parkmerced for decades.
Speakers from the Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods spoke near the end. They explained how the developer had presented the plan to their group and had stated that there was not much opposition among Parkmerced residents. They were moved by the public testimony, noting that there was clearly extensive opposition in the community.
Parkmerced is owned by private equity groups that would have the right to sell the complex to the highest bidder once entitlements are obtained. The same ownership group has financed schemes to displace tenants and redevelop rent controlled housing in New York City. These projects ultimately failed due to tenant opposition and financing problems, raising concerns about the financial viability of the massive development project at Parkmerced.
Under the proposal, over 1500 rent controlled "garden apartments" would be demolished. The construction would extend for decades (up to 30 years of construction), creating an environment that would be miserable for the thousands of residents of Parkmerced, many of whom are very long term tenants. The developer claims that tenants would be relocated to new rent controlled units, but serious question exist as to whether such promises are enforceable in light of state law and recent court rulings.
One thing is clear from the hearing. At long last, tenants at Parkmerced are coming together with each other and community allies to stop this project. They are doing so just in time. The Planning Commission will soon decide whether the massive project will proceed.
Details of the Development Agreement, including rent control and relocation issues, will be presented by Planning Department staff at the Planning Commissions meeting next week. For meeting and agenda information, visit www.sfplanning.org.
If the Planning Commission approves the project, residents could appeal to the Board of Supervisors. Commissioner Sugaya spoke after the public testimony, noting that in the end, "it is a political process" and community members should organize and go to their supervisors.
The Planning Commission deserves credit for having this hearing at San Francisco State University, located right next to Parkmerced. This was highly unusual and allowed many tenants -- including seniors and persons with disabilities -- who may not have been able to come to City Hall the opportunity to participate. The Commission should consider hosting future key meetings concerning the project at the same location given that Parkmerced is so far from City Hall.
Notably absent from the meeting were any politicians. The District's supervisor, Sean Elsbernd, was not present and has been largely silent about this massive redevelopment project proposed in his district. Despite the large number of tenants affected and the city wide implications of the proposed project, not a single mayoral candidate attended the hearing. Expect this to change as the rest of the city realizes the importance of this fight. In the meantime, Supervisors should be urged to tune in to SFGTV this evening at 8:15 to watch the powerful testimony against this project.
Tenants Together opposes the demolition of over 1500 rent controlled homes, particularly given the inadequate tenant protections. Until state law changes to guarantee that demolished rent controlled housing can be replaced with new rent controlled housing, it is hard to see how responsible city officials could approve such a project.
If you are interested in learning more or getting involved, please email info@tenantstogether.org.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Tenants Defeat Ellis Act Eviction in San Francisco
Tenants at a six-unit building in San Francisco prevailed in an Ellis Act eviction case when a San Francisco Superior Court Judge granted summary judgment for the tenants.
As reported earlier this week by Paul Hogarth of BeyondChron.org, the tenants' prior landlords, Kip and Nicole Macy,
This is Collier's second major Ellis Act victory this year. In another closely watched case, he represented Chinatown seniors who refused to vacate when a speculator bought their home and used the Ellis Act to try to evict them. As part of the resolution of that case, the tenants will remain in their homes.
Collier, a staff attorney at Tenderloin Housing Clinic and an expert on Ellis Act evictions, also serves as President of the Board of Directors of Tenants Together.
We congratulate Steve Collier and the tenants he represents for their determined and successful opposition to abusive Ellis Act evictions.
As reported earlier this week by Paul Hogarth of BeyondChron.org, the tenants' prior landlords, Kip and Nicole Macy,
had made local headlines for their battle of intimidation that included hacking into the tenants’ e-mails, cutting out the floor boards, and breaking into their units – after failing to get them out with an Ellis eviction. The Macy’s landed in jail and foreclosed on the building in April 2010, but the new owners tried to add themselves as plaintiffs in the dormant Ellis case. But in the meantime, three of the units had been re-rented – proving the Macy’s didn’t intend to go “out of the rental business.” The Tenderloin Housing Clinic’s Steve Collier represented the tenants in successfully fighting the Ellis eviction.
This is Collier's second major Ellis Act victory this year. In another closely watched case, he represented Chinatown seniors who refused to vacate when a speculator bought their home and used the Ellis Act to try to evict them. As part of the resolution of that case, the tenants will remain in their homes.
Collier, a staff attorney at Tenderloin Housing Clinic and an expert on Ellis Act evictions, also serves as President of the Board of Directors of Tenants Together.
We congratulate Steve Collier and the tenants he represents for their determined and successful opposition to abusive Ellis Act evictions.
Friday, December 3, 2010
Fresno Paper Publishes Story on Hall of Shame
Since 1996, Community Alliance has served as the voice of the progressive movement in Fresno. The front page of their December issue features a story written by TT Organizer Giti Dadlani about the Landlord Hall of Shame.
From Community Alliance:
For years, tenants have tolerated landlord harassment, illegal evictions, hazardous living conditions and other forms of abuse with little recourse. Irresponsible landlords get away with these wrongful actions because of a lack of oversight, transparency and accountability. The lack of public information about these bad actors leaves tenants with no way to learn, in advance, if they are entering into a contract with an unscrupulous landlord, and no way to expose unethical or illegal behavior after the fact.
Visit Community Alliance's website for the full story.
From Community Alliance:
For years, tenants have tolerated landlord harassment, illegal evictions, hazardous living conditions and other forms of abuse with little recourse. Irresponsible landlords get away with these wrongful actions because of a lack of oversight, transparency and accountability. The lack of public information about these bad actors leaves tenants with no way to learn, in advance, if they are entering into a contract with an unscrupulous landlord, and no way to expose unethical or illegal behavior after the fact.
Visit Community Alliance's website for the full story.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Hall of Shame of Nomination Sparks Media Exposé on Fresno Mega-Landlord
After years of neglect, Fresno-based mega-landlord, JD Home Rentals sent a maintenance crew to one of its dilapidated rental properties after a nomination to Tenants Together’s Landlord Hall of Shame landed it in local evening news.
The story was covered by two local TV channels: KSEE 26, NBC and KMPH 24, Fox.
JD Home Rentals, owned and operated by father-son pair John and David Hovannisian, is notorious for renting substandard homes to Fresno’s most vulnerable tenants, including immigrants and low-income residents. The Better Business Bureau of Central California has given JD Home Rentals an ‘F’ score for receiving and failing to respond to a high number of complaints.
Afraid of retaliatory evictions, many JD Home Rentals tenants don’t complain about their substandard living conditions. When they do, their complaints generally go unanswered.
In response to the media spotlight, JD Home Rentals sent representatives to address complaints at one location. See video
It remains to be seen what repairs, if any, the mega-landlord will actually make.
Tenants Together will continue to keep the public pressure on JD Home Rentals and work with local tenant leaders and advocates to make sure that JD Home Rentals brings all its rental properties up to standard so its tenants can live healthy and dignified lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)