As Los Angeles rents keep surging upward and the number of homeless residents climbs higher, city officials are considering new policies that would make it harder for landlords to demolish rent-controlled properties.
On Wednesday, the city council’s Housing Committee received a report from the planning department recommending the addition of a “penalty of perjury” clause to forms required for demolition, giving the city the ability to punish developers who mislead planners about the project’s compliance with the rent stabilization ordinance.
Tenant advocates have long complained that, under current rules, landlords can easily dodge the terms of LA’s rent control laws, whether by changing the scope of a project after tenants have already been evicted or by demolishing properties before potential violations can be investigated.
The planning department also recommended updating the review process for projects that require demolition permits, allowing for better coordination among different city departments and ensuring that properties are only razed once a developer has entitlements to begin construction on new housing. That way, the loss of demolished units affects the city’s overall housing stock for as short a time as possible.
But activists and community members at the meeting Wednesday argued these proposals didn’t go far enough to prevent evictions under California’s Ellis Act, which allows landlords to mass-evict tenants when demolishing buildings or leaving the rental business. Last year, more than 1,370 rent-controlled units were taken off the market through Ellis Act evictions.
Jennifer Ganata, a land use advocate with Inner City Law Center, told the committee that a cap or moratorium on Ellis Act evictions was necessary to preserve the city’s affordable housing stock. She also argued for a tax on vacant units that would encourage landlords to more proactively seek out new tenants.
To do that, the city would first need to establish a new system for tracking vacancies. On Wednesday, planning department staff told the city they were reviewing options, since the old system relied on Los Angeles Department of Water and Power data that’s no longer available.
In May, Councilmember Paul Koretz proposed a new rule blocking condo conversions if the vacancy rate has not been updated within the last year. His motion came amid an appeal from tenants over a condo conversion in Beverly Grove approved using vacancy rate numbers the appellants claimed were out of date. (Under current rules, the vacancy rate in the project area must be over 5 percent before condo conversions are allowed.)
On Wednesday, planner Claire Bowin told the committee that, based on the most recent Census data available, all but two neighborhoods in Los Angeles have a vacancy rate below 5 percent.
- The number of Ellis Act evictions in LA rose again in 2016 [Curbed LA]
- LA OKs Beverly Grove condo conversion over appeals from affordable housing advocates [Curbed LA]
- Hollywood apartments razed in midst of investigation into Ellis Act violations [Curbed LA]
Comments
Over-regulate. Create housing crisis. Impose more regulations. Housing crisis gets worse. Impose more regulations. What do you think the result will be?
Downtown LA is the greatest example of why regulations should be lifted. DT is the easiest place to build dense development and guess what, vacancy rates are in double digits which will eventually lead to lower rents.
By LADude on 09.28.17 1:03pm
Ridiculous. I support laws to keep developers from demolishing properties prematurely or changing the scope of their projects, but capping Ellis Act evictions? Ridiculous.
We have the potential to create MORE inventory in this city, but because it temporarily displaces a small number of beneficiaries of a VERY generous policy that should have allowed them to save money to prepare for such a moment, we have to suffer with low inventory and high rents.
By MMVic on 09.28.17 1:19pm
They are pushing for everything just short of outright stealing properties from landlords for below market value and handing them over to the tenants.
Which is what the insane assholes up in the Portland City Council are actually proposing: http://www.portlandmercury.com/news/2017/09/27/19345213/hall-monitor-dibs
By disqusted on 09.28.17 3:24pm
That is simply absurd. How exactly do they propose to get "first dibs" and claim it to be "at market value" purchases without letting the open market decide the value? Do the landlords at least get to throw up whatever asking price they want in those first 90 days where only the tenants (first 60 days) and city (next 30 days) get to negotiate? I could imagine the tenants coming in with laughable lowball offers, same with the city. If it was right of first refusal, well ok then fine. But this is truly pathetic.
By KosherLandlord on 09.28.17 9:21pm
"How exactly do they propose to get "first dibs" and claim it to be "at market value" purchases without letting the open market decide the value?"
The most obvious, and only one of many, many problematic aspects with this type of scheme. It even states in the article the City is hoping this scheme will let them get more properties at a lower price than competing/bidding on the open market, so they are already tacitly admitting it’s not going to be a "market value" purchase that they are foisting upon would-be sellers.
By disqusted on 09.29.17 12:22pm
Bunch of shitty band-aid measures that do literally nothing (and actively work against) the fundamental and only way to solve LA’s housing issues, i.e., BUILD MORE HOUSING. Vacancy rates are crazy low. The failed rent control scheme has already distorted the market to the point where it makes financial sense to pay tens of thousands of dollars in relocation costs and jump through massive regulatory hoops just to be able to convert a property into a different use. This is just piling insanity on top of failure.
By disqusted on 09.28.17 3:15pm
Concur, well said; but you know, that’s exact what liberals want to do here in LA. Thus the reason they don’t get my support most of the time. It’s difficult to find ideas that are practical and logical on the left side of the spectrum—(the majority here)
By LeBasque on 09.28.17 3:45pm
I’m a liberal. Paul Krugman, who thinks rent control is terrible policy (along with 90% of economists generally) is a liberal. It’s a special-interest policy, not a liberal policy.
By disqusted on 09.28.17 9:03pm
Don’t be näive. Maybe your an exception to the rule, but these "special interest" groups are spearheaded and funded by liberals like (Soros). Name one conservative who is behind this? Never going to find them.
By LeBasque on 10.01.17 5:27pm
"Name one conservative who is behind this?"
How about every conservative who lives in an RSO units and thereby saves money at everyone else’s expense. Ayn Rand railed against "socialism" and mooched off it. Deeds count just as much as words.
By disqusted on 10.02.17 10:39am
Agree with comments above (welll, except the guy pooping on liberals)
Rents will not become reasonable until rent control is eliminated. Rent control creates a handful of winners, who get significantly cheaper rent at the expense of the rest of the population. Kill rent control now!
By SocalChill on 09.28.17 3:49pm
It’s a two fold need – remove rent control AND loosen zoning. Removing rent control without fixing zoning just keeps inventory the same and allows massive price increases.
By MMVic on 09.28.17 4:42pm
It creates a handful of winners, and among those winners are plenty of people who could afford market rents since rent control is by the age and type of the property, not means tested for income or need. And since rent can jump to market in the event of a vacancy, no low-income person who needs the assistance is going to have the income and credit to qualify for any RSO unit that recently reset to market rates, so looking forward it’s doing even less to benefit the lower income part of our population.
It’s an insanely bad policy for so many reasons, but it’s an extremely entrenched political interest.
By disqusted on 09.28.17 9:06pm
slippery slope telling citizens what they can and can’t do with their buildings.
By cicinla on 09.28.17 4:54pm
Yeah, housing regulations have never existed until this city council meeting.
By BH90008 on 09.28.17 5:37pm
Rent control does not work. Los Angeles is an example of that.
By bettershelter on 09.28.17 5:18pm
All of you guys figured out. How come they can not?
Ellis Act is a state law you can not over ride it with a local law.
By High Rent on 09.28.17 8:17pm
Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department (HCIDLA) charges both renters and owners annual fees to run their rent control scam. They charge all kinds of other fees, plus they get our tax money, and any dollar they can get their hands on to keep their bureaucracy bloated with city workers. Meanwhile their managers are raking in the salaries…..and imagine the lifetime pensions we will all pay for!
2016 Total Pay (transparentcalifornia.com)
Rushmore Cervantes $242k
Roberto Aldape $195k
Laura Guglielmo $191k
Luz C Santiago $170k
Abigail R Marquez $134K
Plus dozens and dozens of other city paid employees.
By LA Living on 09.29.17 9:01am
How do I get in on this scam? If I’m already doing nothing to solve LA’s housing crisis like these clowns, I’d love to get paid for it!
By disqusted on 09.29.17 12:25pm
Tax on vacant units? lol
By dudeimstarving on 09.29.17 10:05am
How do we remove these bimbos from office?
Eventually they’re going to over-regulate to the point where developers destroy buildings and hold the land out of spite of Los Angeles’ ignorance. Let the free market control prices and stop over regulating development, permits, prices and all the other $@%#* they regulate. If people move, let them move. If people raise prices, let them raise prices and see demand fall for their product. Los Angeles politicians should understand that Rent Control does not work, there are so many studies on it but they’re blinded by the $$$ and tenant advocacy votes.
By kayjay0331 on 09.29.17 2:46pm
You know this is going to pass. Siding with advocacy gives them "for the people" cred.
By savvysearch on 09.29.17 11:41pm
These "Advocates" really burn my ass. All they want is more tax dollars more tax increases, more regulations, more more more. The free market in Cali is totally broken by all these laws and regulations and taxes and fees, you people need to vote out these socialist pro illegal immigrant political hacks and vote in people who will abolish all of the rent control and all of the regulations and taxes and fees so that developers can actually build new housing that is needed. These people are so ignornant to the simple rule of supply and demand, they basicall want free housing paid by taxpayers for illegals and the dirt poor, backdoor wealth redistribution and the political hacks go along with it.
By NoSpinFTL on 10.12.17 8:27am