Well done Lydia. Thank you for bringing topic again to the forefront. The "Ma and Pa" ownership of rental properties is being lost. Usually these owners are the most compassionate to their tenants and often have life long relationships with them.
Our states tenant rights laws are already so strict that landlords are having a difficult time evicting tenants. It can take up to a year to secure a court ordered eviction. That is a year of lost income and stress. It is time to revisit our laws and find a solution that offers equal protection for the landlords & responsible tenants. Cities do not need to add to the landlords burden.
" . . a year to secure an eviction . " I had a property in Santa Monica, the tenant wouldn't move. I had my 'agent' (he looked like Charles Bronson) knock on the door - "Out or else!" The tenant was out in a week.
Great article, I agree with the author, and I don't nor would I ever own residential rental property in SB. Check out San Francisco if you want to see what the future of rent controls looks like.
The fact that they cannot balance their own budget and face no repercussions, leads them to believe(falsely) that they can place monetary restrictions on their constituents and still face no pushback. A problem that has now gone statewide for the last 20 years. Vote the bums out! Wake up California your state is on fire.
I once owned and rented several single family homes in Santa Barbara and Goleta. Taking one as an example, a 3/3 1600 sq ft in Goleta. According to Zillow the market price for this home is about 1.5M and estimated rent is $6200. As owner my monthly cost to finance 1.5 M, pay property tax, insure and maintain this property is $7,000 - $10,000 per month. Based on these numbers, rents are too low in Santa Barbara.
If there are people who need assistance in paying for life's expenses, that assistance should come from society as a whole, through the government. It is wrong and too easy to force the landlords to provide this charitable assistance. Berney Gans
Insanity continues. I have a rental property in SB and I lose many each year. Wake up all of us who live and work in SB. We are the only ones to stop this. Vote out all the people on the board. Lower the wages that they get. If you haven’t looked at the salaries don’t now. We need common sense back into our government.
What constitutes a “fair and reasonable return” and more importantly who is to determine this? Not the Supreme Ct, not the State Legislature and not the SB City Council but rather the market place
Thanks to all who spoke last night at the council meeting on this topic. I state again, the city could gain a LOT of support from Housing Providers if it just did one simple thing. Take the restrictions on income they want to apply to housing providers and apply it to city revenue. The same exact numbers. Let the city expenses continue to climb un checked. Do that for 3 years. And release a study about how amazing it works. I am sure once they show us how it is done, we would all follow their example. Or. They would drop this before they are locked up in lawsuits for the next few years and ultimately lose. Wise people would see the obvious choice here.
If the Santa Barbara City Council is breaking the law established by California State Legislators, what is the recourse for landlords in the city of Santa Barbara, individually, or as a group?
In yesterday's SB Current I referenced a text book example of the consequence of rent control that appeared in an article in CREDaily.com that addresses this issue in real time. It contrast Minnesota's St. Paul draconian rent "stabilization" and Minneapolis'. Both are left wing hubs, however Minneapolis did not go full Communist as did St. Paul.
The arrogance and ignorance of City Council members who believe their socialistic agenda supersedes standing law by pandering to the "free lunch" groupies is egregious. If passed, such 'legislation" will result in a calamitous legal battle funded by taxpayers. Would the City Attorney has the integrity (obligation) to defend residents against the rogue and illegal actions of a miscreant City Council or would that office defend the Council...remembering that the Council hires the City Attorney whose salary is paid by the citizens....the very people harmed by a reckless City Council. Welcome to America.
When a low income person shows up at the emergency room, they receive attention. A similar policy applies when many low income persons show up at a Council hearing. An issue not addressed? Potential undoing of the Housing Element.
From the Independent, "Councilmembers Meagan Harmon, Kristen Sneddon, Wendy Santamaria, and Oscar Gutierrez all supported the rent cap, and all four voted in favor of a rent increase moratorium, which will be considered in January."
60% of CPI ?!! CA CPI is currently 3.3% which means a landlord can increase his $2,500 rent by just $49.50 per month. That _might_ cover 2 hours of his maintenance guy sweeping the driveway. Does that frost my ass!
What logic justifies the government dictating what the landlord can do with his private property? We gotta get rid of these stinking Commie-Dems and get a governor like Steve Hilton in Sacramento and dump the dopes in Santa Barbara!
Strong legal framing on the fair return doctrine. The gap between state law's 5% plus CPI and the proposed 60% CPI cap is exactly where the constitutional violation sits, and most tenant advocates dunno how Kavanau precedent works in practice. Saw similar attempts in other CA cities collapse under judicial review precisely because they ignored the takings clause. The maintenance decline feedback loop you mention is legit, once small landlords exit the market the housing stock quality tanks faster than policy makers expect.
Well done Lydia. Thank you for bringing topic again to the forefront. The "Ma and Pa" ownership of rental properties is being lost. Usually these owners are the most compassionate to their tenants and often have life long relationships with them.
Our states tenant rights laws are already so strict that landlords are having a difficult time evicting tenants. It can take up to a year to secure a court ordered eviction. That is a year of lost income and stress. It is time to revisit our laws and find a solution that offers equal protection for the landlords & responsible tenants. Cities do not need to add to the landlords burden.
" . . a year to secure an eviction . " I had a property in Santa Monica, the tenant wouldn't move. I had my 'agent' (he looked like Charles Bronson) knock on the door - "Out or else!" The tenant was out in a week.
I choose to go the legal route, although using muscle is tempting;)
Hi Rhonda - it wasn't muscle, it was a 'suggestion': (but if you saw this guy you'd definitely get the idea :)
Great article, I agree with the author, and I don't nor would I ever own residential rental property in SB. Check out San Francisco if you want to see what the future of rent controls looks like.
The fact that they cannot balance their own budget and face no repercussions, leads them to believe(falsely) that they can place monetary restrictions on their constituents and still face no pushback. A problem that has now gone statewide for the last 20 years. Vote the bums out! Wake up California your state is on fire.
I once owned and rented several single family homes in Santa Barbara and Goleta. Taking one as an example, a 3/3 1600 sq ft in Goleta. According to Zillow the market price for this home is about 1.5M and estimated rent is $6200. As owner my monthly cost to finance 1.5 M, pay property tax, insure and maintain this property is $7,000 - $10,000 per month. Based on these numbers, rents are too low in Santa Barbara.
If there are people who need assistance in paying for life's expenses, that assistance should come from society as a whole, through the government. It is wrong and too easy to force the landlords to provide this charitable assistance. Berney Gans
Insanity continues. I have a rental property in SB and I lose many each year. Wake up all of us who live and work in SB. We are the only ones to stop this. Vote out all the people on the board. Lower the wages that they get. If you haven’t looked at the salaries don’t now. We need common sense back into our government.
What constitutes a “fair and reasonable return” and more importantly who is to determine this? Not the Supreme Ct, not the State Legislature and not the SB City Council but rather the market place
Thanks to all who spoke last night at the council meeting on this topic. I state again, the city could gain a LOT of support from Housing Providers if it just did one simple thing. Take the restrictions on income they want to apply to housing providers and apply it to city revenue. The same exact numbers. Let the city expenses continue to climb un checked. Do that for 3 years. And release a study about how amazing it works. I am sure once they show us how it is done, we would all follow their example. Or. They would drop this before they are locked up in lawsuits for the next few years and ultimately lose. Wise people would see the obvious choice here.
If the Santa Barbara City Council is breaking the law established by California State Legislators, what is the recourse for landlords in the city of Santa Barbara, individually, or as a group?
In yesterday's SB Current I referenced a text book example of the consequence of rent control that appeared in an article in CREDaily.com that addresses this issue in real time. It contrast Minnesota's St. Paul draconian rent "stabilization" and Minneapolis'. Both are left wing hubs, however Minneapolis did not go full Communist as did St. Paul.
The arrogance and ignorance of City Council members who believe their socialistic agenda supersedes standing law by pandering to the "free lunch" groupies is egregious. If passed, such 'legislation" will result in a calamitous legal battle funded by taxpayers. Would the City Attorney has the integrity (obligation) to defend residents against the rogue and illegal actions of a miscreant City Council or would that office defend the Council...remembering that the Council hires the City Attorney whose salary is paid by the citizens....the very people harmed by a reckless City Council. Welcome to America.
When a low income person shows up at the emergency room, they receive attention. A similar policy applies when many low income persons show up at a Council hearing. An issue not addressed? Potential undoing of the Housing Element.
Lydia , great article. Who were the votes to move forward with the resolution? thanks
From the Independent, "Councilmembers Meagan Harmon, Kristen Sneddon, Wendy Santamaria, and Oscar Gutierrez all supported the rent cap, and all four voted in favor of a rent increase moratorium, which will be considered in January."
Well said. Thank for putting it in a clear and concise statement.
60% of CPI ?!! CA CPI is currently 3.3% which means a landlord can increase his $2,500 rent by just $49.50 per month. That _might_ cover 2 hours of his maintenance guy sweeping the driveway. Does that frost my ass!
What logic justifies the government dictating what the landlord can do with his private property? We gotta get rid of these stinking Commie-Dems and get a governor like Steve Hilton in Sacramento and dump the dopes in Santa Barbara!
Strong legal framing on the fair return doctrine. The gap between state law's 5% plus CPI and the proposed 60% CPI cap is exactly where the constitutional violation sits, and most tenant advocates dunno how Kavanau precedent works in practice. Saw similar attempts in other CA cities collapse under judicial review precisely because they ignored the takings clause. The maintenance decline feedback loop you mention is legit, once small landlords exit the market the housing stock quality tanks faster than policy makers expect.