Correspondence - #33 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DOWDALL LAW OFFICES A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION ATTO R N EYS AT LAW City Council of the City of Santa Ana City of Santa Ana September 16, 2021 Page 2 A response to an 86 page proposal, addressing the particular issues and concerns of the property owners I represent, is itself a lengthy endeavor for which I beg your patience and understanding. But my clients cannot stand silent on this proposal unread, just to find out what's in it. ' We cannot simply agree to the long-lasting ramifications of an unrelenting shackling of revenue adjustments necessary to fund, maintain, and build new enterprises within the city and our properties. The long-lasting and underlying message of outdated rent control (and this particular old-fashioned system of rent control, now fifty years old is clearly passe and hopelessly obsolete), is that the city is willingly entering an economic retrograde. This move, will doom the reputation of the city in perpetuity. It's not a decision that can be "walked back." The proposed ordinance, among ordinances, is a model T in a Tesla world —not the forward thinking and progressive approach for which the city of Santa Ana is reputed. This office has experienced rent control as negotiated, contested, and in some instances, even promoted where fair to all parties. This office has been engaged in representation concerning rent control for more than forty years. We can tell you, based on experience, that residents are happiest when there is long- term security, stability, and peace. This ordinance cuts the other direction and ensures divisiveness. After forty years of working in the rent control area, I can tell you that there are better ways, among the legal options, to accomplish identified objectives: to protect the city, grow its affordable housing, and offer affordable housing opportunity. Fifty -year -old rent control philosophy is truly a step backward. Forward thinking and progressive ideas for providing secure and stable residential housing are before you now. What a shame to ignore them. DISBURSE S42,000,000,00. NOW. The City should pass out the money --immediately disburse S42 Million Dollars now on hand to provide immediate relief to mobilehome tenants (in lieu of unnecessary rent control laws). The City has in its power, now, the ability to stop virtually every non-payment eviction in the City. The City cannot do its job, and now blames park owners? If the City did not distribute overflowing supplies from a food bank would landlords be blamed for ongoing hunger?? WHY THIS PROPOSAL MAKES NO SENSE, HERE: This is an egregious overreach and especially, unjustly, punishes innocent "mom and pops" that have only treated everyone with respect, kept tenants in their homes, help residents with rent reimbursements. Owners operating valuable housing at modest rates —despite claims which make no sense. Mobilehome owners can sell their homes at huge profits today. Rents are not exceeding market rates. If so, where? None of the "mom and pops" are getting rich in Santa Ana, and they are not responsible for the surging economy which cannot be measured by CPI it is widely accepted that CPI is a false reflection of inflation, tainted with political influence from both sides of the aisle. Given the influx of millions of dollars of unspent immediate and direct rent relief today, the vague and nebulous future rental regulations cannot measure up. Rent controls are wrong for "We [need] to pass the bill in order to find out what [is] in it." Nancy Pelosi, 20 June 2017, at https:/Iwww.snopes.com/fact-cheek/pelosi-healthcare-pass-the-bill-to-see-what-is-in-it/.