We had a server outage, and we're rebuilding the site. Some of the site features won't work. Thank you for your patience.
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
Features
latest news
best of news
syndication
commentary


KILLRADIO

VozMob

ABCF LA

A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List

LAAMN List




IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles

View article without comments

Debunking Some Anti-Prop 10 Propaganda

by john Friday, Oct. 12, 2018 at 6:56 AM

The opposition is out there spreading half truths. I have nothing to do with the Yes on Prop 10 campaign, but feel compelled to address these simple fabrications that the opposition has made.

These three statements on the "prop 10 flaws" website are all true. And bogus. They're deceptive. They're completely bogus, because they bring up a bunch of claims that have nothing to do with Proposition 10.

Proposition 10 repeals the Costa Hawkins act, which prevents rent control from applying to housing built after 1995 and single family residence rentals. This is a statewide law that takes local control away from cities and counties, and deprives them of one possible tool to address rising housing prices.

Prop 10 does not implement rent control. It just allows cities and counties to pass rent control laws, if they want to.

That's it. It's simple. It's a well, written, narrow law.

They say: Prop 10 does not collect tax money for affordable housing. They say that, and it's true. It doesn't. Cities and counties have their own ways to collect that tax. There are laws like measure H, HHH, JJJ, and many others that fund affordable housing.

They say: Prop 10 does not force cities to build affordable housing that's in their general plan. Again, "true", but also bogus. Prop 10 doesn't force cities to do anything.

They say: Prop 10 doesn't provide immediate relief -- but what does that even mean? Prop 10 repeals a law called Costa-Hawkins that impedes cities from regulating out-of-control rent increases. If the local landlords are doing 25% rent increases, many cities have a hard time passing rent control laws to regulate this harmful behavior.

The law, as it exists today, prevents rent control from applying to units built after 1995. So residents in a 20 year old building might see a big rent increase, and the city might want to pass rent control to help... but they cannot.

Voting Yes on 10 will allow cities to do what they want, to deal with their local housing issues.

Vote Yes on 10.

Report this post as:

Parsing More Weird Criticisms

by john Friday, Oct. 12, 2018 at 7:28 AM

Definitely a strange statement.

Landlords *are* converting units to short term rentals and condos. There really isn't anything preventing it in most of the state.

Prop 10 won't suddenly allow it. It's already happening.

A lot of landlords are eagerly trying to make money on the listing websites like AirBNB.

Prop 10 doesn't deal with them.

Do you know what else Prop 10 allows? It allows me to sing in the shower. It allows me to go camping. It allows me to walk in circles.

Report this post as:

Scare Words, Parsed

by john Friday, Oct. 12, 2018 at 7:44 AM

This quote was a trip. It was full of "trigger words" to activate old time conservatives.

"Unelected bureaucrats"

"impose fees"

I happen to live under rent control, and the bureaucracy exists, but you hardly ever hear from them.

Inspections happen. They cost a little money.

Report this post as:

Affordable Housing Construction

by john Monday, Oct. 15, 2018 at 2:20 AM

On the No on 10 site, a couple quotes mention "affordable housing construction" and say that passing 10 will impede it.

I don't understand that logic.

First of all, according to Rent Cafe, 100% of apartments built in Los Angeles were "luxury" apartments.

https://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental-market/luxury-apartments/8-out-of-10-new-apartment-buildings-were-high-end-in-2017-trend-carries-on-into-2018/

So, let's see... what affordable housing construction?

It looks like market conditions, by themselves, have stopped affordable housing construction.

Except for Affordable Housing, of course - that is, LIHTC / tax credit financed products that are subsidized by either tax credits and the government. I don't think that's what they meant.

I suppose it could jeopardize funding if apartment prices stabilized, and profits declined, so that there would be fewer companies buying the tax credits that fund affordable housing. That would be bad.

But that would mean that the masses of tenants are seeing stable rents, which would be good.

The real answer is obvious: acknowledge that the market cannot serve low-income people, and start building public housing again. The struggle to pass Prop 10 is part of that fight - if you ask the people involved, many are for bringing back public housing.

Report this post as:

The "No" Side is Spreading Disinfo

by john Monday, Oct. 15, 2018 at 2:37 AM

OK, this last quote on the "no" side is a doozy.

First, they perpetuate the mistaken idea that Prop 10 would institute rent control. It would not - it would only repeal Costa Hawkins. Costa Hawkins prevents rent control from applying to buildings built after 1995, and single family residences.

Second, they perpetuate the bogus idea that rent control prevents rents from rising at all.

All the rent controls I've ever seen allow rents to be raised by a rent board. In Los Angeles, they usually raise it 3%, which is higher than the rate of inflation.

Property taxes rise at 2%. Inflation is around 2.3%. So all those costs that she's talking about rise at a rate SLOWER and LOWER than the existing rent control rent increases.

In Pico Rivera, their rent cap is 6%, which is 3x as much at the rise in property taxes, and over 2x the rise in inflation.

These are real world rent control laws. The person being quoted here, is punching against a shadow, a ghost, a fake idea about rent control. Keep swinging, because you won't hit anything.

Rent control is basic business regulation. It's a market reform.

It regulates how much rents can rise. It regulates the quality of a rental unit. It also assures that owners will have a profit, believe it or not - the regulation is allowed, but if the owner can prove that it impedes making a profit, the courts will allow a rent increase, until there is a reasonable profit margin.

Report this post as:

© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy