Laserfiche WebLink
DOWDALL LAW OFFICES <br />A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION <br />ATTO R N EYS AT LAW <br />City Council of the City of Santa Ana <br />City of Santa Ana <br />September 16, 2021 <br />Page 3 <br />the City, and would mark the toppling of a progressive policy of new and free enterprise favoring <br />housing opportunity, new housing and jobs and affordable housing in the City. Rent control is a <br />not so subtle message that the dream is over. Supporters will flee and housing purveyors will <br />shun newly rent -controlled Santa Ana, especially in the heart of a previously reputedly pro - <br />housing Orange County. Rather, the professional and articulate rent control advocates in this <br />instance seek the harshest most intrusive remedy possible, without first having explored (much <br />less exhausted) any potential for voluntary options, commitments and understandings to bridge <br />the gap and bring people together. Rent control strives for divisiveness, anxiety and frustrated <br />expectations for everyone. The path to the courthouse is not the way to bring people together. <br />Really, the devastating impact of rent controls is the same as setting the city afire. This <br />ham-fisted overreaction, again, ignores $42,000,000 of rent money sitting in your hands today. It <br />ignores the promise of the state of California to reimburse 100% of rents that are currently due. <br />Taking advantage of these existing programs saves taxpayers from the huge expense of a rent <br />control bureaucracy that will never end. You do not need legislation, you need more <br />administrators to hand out cash to your renters directly. You have the "steak," and rent control <br />proponents are trying to sell you "hamburger." A superior remedy lies in your hands today with <br />"zero" impact on taxpayers. <br />Due to the length of this letter, and as a convenience to the reader, a summary of the <br />arguments made, the facts upon which these arguments are made, and a discussion of the <br />problems and legal infirmities with regard to the proposed ordinance are set forth here. <br />101111 1.10 OI_V I II.MIIu 11101111 141943 O[KINK I NCO I <br />1. EXPLORATION OF LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL INFIRMITIES <br />— COMMENTS RE RECITALS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............. <br />5 <br />2. CPI FAILS TO ACCURATELY MEASURE INFLATION. THE CONSUMER <br />PRICE INDEX IS A WOEFULLY DEFICIENT MEASURE OF ACTUAL <br />INFLATION. RELIANCE ON CPI WILL BRING FORTH A FLOOD OF <br />PETITIONS FOR RENTAL ADJUSTMENTS .................................... <br />7 <br />3. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES STUDIED? NO . ........................ <br />13 <br />4. THE ORDINANCE ESTABLISHES THE SANTA ANA RENT BOARD, <br />WHICH HAS AN IMBALANCED COMPOSITION THAT FAILS THE <br />TEST OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL ............... <br />24 <br />5. BEGINNING RENT LEVELS MUST EQUAL PREVAILING GENERAL <br />MARKET CONDITIONS (Vega), AND CANNOT BE LIMITED TO <br />EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES ......................................... <br />29 <br />What isa Veea adinstment?................................................. <br />30 <br />6. THERE ARE NO CONSTITUTIONAL FACTS WHICH CAN PROVE THAT IT <br />IS NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH AND IMPOSE MANDATORY RENT <br />CONTROL. SANTA ANA IS AN ECONOMICALLY FUNCTIONING <br />