Terminating the Tenancy What You Need To Know
Guest Speakers: Franco Simone & Lera Blevins of Simone and Belvins, Landlords’ Legal Center.
THE APARTMENT DEALER: Apartment Fix & Flip Project – Episodes 1 & 2
SYNOPSIS: In a rent-controlled world, how do you collect above-market rental rates when there is a Rent Cap in place? The truth is, you can’t…unless you vacate a unit legally by completing “substantial improvements.” How do you determine if a unit warrants substantial improvement?
Bottom Line – I want to help landlords obtain maximum cash-flow (especially in a rent-controlled market). In my opinion, owning multi-family investments should be extremely financially rewarding, while at the same time not be overly consuming of your time. Second, by completing these types of improvements, when it is time to sell, a buyer will happily over-pay for your property because your rental rates & the condition of the property justifies above-market pricing!!! -Kristopher German, The Apartment Dealer
EDITOR’S NOTE: This is not a promoted post. This is great information from Kristopher German. He’s insightful and is producing some unique content I believe will be beneficial to my core audience.
Say NO to L.A.’s Measures ULA and SP, and NO to Pasadena Rent Control!
The following is a repost of the mailer received from The Brennan Law Firm.
Stop the Further Spread of Rent Control – Don’t Let Tenant Groups Have a Mandate for More! No More Tax Hikes! Measures ULA and SP Will Increase The Cost Of Living For All L.A. Residents.
| City of Los Angeles’ New Tax Proposals With today’s inflation exceeding 8% and at a 40-year high, there’s no way we should be increasing any taxes that make it more expensive to live or work in the Los Angeles area. And this is exactly what Measures ULA and SP want to do. Measures ULA and SP will appear on the November ballot and be decided upon by the City of Los Angeles’ voters. You must vote NO on these ballot measures. Together, these two measures create a $1.1 billion property tax increase — the largest tax increase in the city’s history — that will drive up the cost of everything. If they pass, rents for apartments and small businesses will go up by 6%. Owners of commercial buildings and multifamily housing will be “hit” the most by the passage of these measures, and as a result, prices for consumer goods and all types of services will be increased to pay for these new taxes – ultimately, consumers will bear the burden of these two measures through higher prices on goods and services of all kinds. And make no mistake about it, measures ULA and SP will increase property taxes for L.A. renters, homeowners, and small businesses — dismantling decades of Prop 13 protections! More About Measure ULA • Measure ULA, the so-called “United to House L.A.” initiative would put a new “documentary transfer tax” on property sales of $5 million or more. Any property that sells for between $5 million and $10 million would be hit with a tax of 4% of the sale price, and properties selling for more than $10 million would get slammed with a tax of 5.5%. That’s an $800 million new tax and a lot of money for transferring documents. • Measure ULA would be the largest property tax increase in the City of Los Angeles’ history — a whopping 34% hike! The measure would result in a special interest giveaway to a select few “affordable housing” developers in Los Angeles who on average charge $600,000 to $800,000 a unit while increasing costs for everyday Angelenos. • The stated purpose of the new Measure ULA tax is to address, what else, homelessness. Some of the money would go toward the construction of 26,000 new units of housing over ten years. The rest of the money would go toward homelessness prevention, a combination of emergency rent relief, income assistance for disabled tenants, and free legal services for tenants facing eviction. However, we have already seen the disaster of Measure HHH, the lagging deployment of funds, and the skyrocketing costs of construction under Measure HHH with one-bedroom units costing upwards of $800,000 each! • Proponents claim the measure is targeting billionaires…don’t buy the B.S. New taxes will need to be paid for somehow, and that somehow is through higher prices on all goods and services. Ultimately, average consumers will bear the costs associated with these additional taxes. • Measure ULA would establish a new layer of government bureaucracy through the new, “L.A. Citizens Oversight Committee” and Tenant Councils that could cost taxpayers as much $70 million a year in new administrative and overhead costs. More About Measure SP • Proponents of the measure say it is a simple extension of Proposition K … don’t buy it for a second. Proposition K does not expire until 2026, and Measure SP is a 908% increase over Proposition K! • Measure SP would raise the property taxes for renters, homeowners, and small businesses in L.A., which would result in price increases on all types of consumer goods and services. • If passed, the average family of four would pay hundreds of dollars more each year in additional property taxes. • Measure SP would allow the City of Los Angeles to levy a “special tax” of about eight cents per square foot to help fund parks and other recreational projects. • Measure SP’s tax increase is being proposed despite the fact that Angelenos already pay for new parks through two existing tax measures. • The City of Los Angeles already has $150 million in unallocated park funds that should be used before Angeleno homeowners are forced to pay another tax hike. Measure SP is completely unnecessary. Pasadena Rent Control Measure Also, on the ballot, this November is a proposal to impose rent control and tenant eviction protections in the City of Pasadena. If this ballot measure passes, the new law would: • Limit rent increases to 75% of the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index; • Establish a Pasadena Rental Housing Board; and • Provide guidelines around “just cause” evictions. We cannot let this measure pass – Tenant groups will be more likely to attempt similar measures in other jurisdictions – DON’T give tenant groups a mandate to pass more rent control! We cannot let this measure pass. The Apartment Association has formed a coalition of stakeholders to oppose the ballot measure. PLEASE HELP! Let’s stop this now! If we fail, tenant groups will have a mandate to establish strict rent control measures within other jurisdictions. Please support the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles’s Issues PAC. HELP Defeat These Ballot Proposals We cannot afford to allow Measures ULA and SP, nor the Pasadena rent control ballot initiative pass this November. Vote NO. Give to our issues PAC today. We have undertaken major fundraising efforts to defeat Measures ULA and SP, and the rent control ballot initiative in Pasadena. These funds will be used to conduct research and buy media and create collateral materials, among other things, to oppose the ballot initiative. |
For More Information:
Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles
621 South Westmoreland Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90010
Tel. (213) 384-4131
How Rent Control Hurts Renters
California has a statewide rent cap limiting how much a property owner can raise rent annually. Certain cities have existing Rent Stabilization Ordinances, also known as, Rent Control. Some of those cities have had rent control for decades.
The list of cities enacting their own RSOs has been growing a lot more since the signing of AB 1482 and the Endemic Lockdowns.
With all the existing rent control zones and the statewide rent caps, rents are still the highest in the country and housing supply remains limited. More on the latter part another time. For now, please watch this excellent summary for as to How Rent Control Hurts Renters.
It’s like I always said, “Rent Control has failed every time it’s tried.” So why keep pushing for it if it doesn’t do what it’s intended to do?
This would be why:
Oppose rent control every time it’s brought up.
California 2022 Ballot Measures
There’s always some new tax to “help the homeless,” or for “education.” This election cycle is full of such ballots. Get educated on them.
This episode of California Insider serves as an overview to the ballots that will appear on the General Election 2022.
SB 679: Los Angeles County Affordable Housing? NOPE!
BACKGROUND (Courtesy of the Pacific West Association of Realtors®)
SB 679 creates a finance agency to fund the construction of subsidized housing developments. The agency can also purchase existing residential properties, including single family homes further contributing to the shortage of homeownership opportunities.
SB 679 grants an unchecked tax and bond authority to a 21 member “governing board” that could authorize local ballot initiatives to impose: a parcel tax, gross receipt tax, documentary transfer tax or authorize the issuance of bonds. Any of those taxes or costs on their own would create new burdens for homeowners struggling in a tough economic environment. Furthermore, the bill has no cap on the maximum amount homeowners can be taxed and these taxes could be layered on top of each other.
SB 679 is completely unnecessary and duplicative. There is no need for a costly new bureaucracy to do things that can already be undertaken by Los Angeles County in conjunction with its cities.
Click Here To Contact Your Legislature
Susan Shelley, VP of Communications at the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer’s Association, was previously on with the AOA USA to discuss SB 679. You may recognize her from her appearance on my program. You can see my discussion with her below.
Does N.A.R.’s Article 10-5 Help Regulate “Hate Speech?” – A Response To RISMedia
I came across an article yesterday on RISMedia that captured my attention. The approximately 9-minute read by Jesse Williams published March 1, 2022, is titled “Regulating Hate Speech: Article 10-5 in 2022.”
Subscribers that tune into my program should recognize this as the REALTOR Code of Ethics and Standards of Practices section that I have covered on several occasions.
Jesse Williams references certain incidents and claims of racism to support NAR’s Article 10-5 and hyperlinks them where applicable. No issues there. I implore anyone reading the article to see the references for more context. There are certain unsourced claims that have no place in the article, and some cases that merit a counter-argument.
Please bear in mind, I do not intend to rebuttal the concerns of racism today, rather my aim is to address certain unsubstantiated claims and provide context that give weight to the counter-points against Article 10-5 itself.
According To Hoyle
First off, the RISMedia article alludes to REALTOR conduct during the Black Lives Matters riots in 2020. Jesse Williams mentions that during that time, certain REALTORS were “using slurs and airing ugly, racist ideas, stereotypes, attacks, and incitements – sometimes in person, often on social media.” While no sources were cited, I was left wondering what those attacks and incitements were Jesse was referring to.
Or is the issue Jesse has problems with the REALTORS “hate speech?” Are these claims of “hate speech” a bigger issue than the fact that people were killed, livelihoods were destroyed, neighborhoods were razed, businesses ruined, and Americans divided?
I bring up this point not only since it was mentioned a few times in the article, but also because Jesse Williams brings up the unreferenced and unsubstantiated claims of racial slurs against Black police officers during the January 6 riot.
Both of these events are a stain on our history. One cannot simply condone one and condemn the other. And for the printed record, I’ve condemned both violent riots on my program.
I highlight these very important sections of the article, because it explains the tone and, in my opinion, exposes the intent of the article.
Due Process
The second point I want to address is the oft mentioned infamous “steering” case in Long Island, New York, published by Newsday. This 3-year long investigative project was published in 2019, but got more traction in 2020, because of the above referenced events. This alleged case of steering was taken at face value and further emboldened the NAR to take action against REALTORS as a whole. This despite the fact that New York is one of the strictest, if not THE strictest state with REALTOR regulations. Keep this in mind.
What about any follow up to that story? Whatever became of those REALTORS “caught on tape” steering minorities away from certain neighborhoods? Any punishments issued?
A few months ago, a judge in New York ruled that one of the Newsday project testers “was not credible,” resulting in the cases brought by The New York Department of state against two REALTORS accused on tape, to either be dismissed or have charges dropped. Those REALTORS are back to work as of September 2021.
That case is on-going.
Let me be clear: I support holding accountable those breaking Fair Housing Laws.
Habeas Corpus
Which brings me to the third and final point that I’ll make: Article 10-5 is quite literally meant to target REALTORS and control their private lives. Failure to comply with this egregious breach of 1st Amendment rights could result in members being disbarred from all REALTOR association chapters. The ramifications being losing the ability to conduct most of any real estate business. Case in point: Pastor Brandon Huber vs The Missoula Association of Realtors lawsuit.
Pastor Huber disassociated his church from the Missoula Food Bank June 2021, after a volunteer church member discovered the food bank was including LGBTQ flyers in the lunches sponsored by the church – without consulting with the church leaders. If this sounds familiar to you, it is because I recently interviewed Pastor Huber and his attorney.
I have yet to see RISMedia bring on Pastor Huber to explain his side of the story. Instead, they’ve published articles by LGBTQ+ groups calling on Pastor Huber to be removed from all association of REALTORS. Pastor Huber is currently suing the Missoula Association of Realtors and the National Association of Realtors.
Finitione
Despite it’s good intentions, NAR’s Article 10-5, as I warned on November 2020, has been used against Christian REALTORS. The Jesse Williams’ article seems to conclude that NAR should double-down on it. This is not the solution to address hate speech and racism. In today’s hyper political and polarized environment, it is hard to have conversations with one another. Most things now are subjective rather than objective. When it comes to regulating and monitoring “hate speech” – online or in person – who then defines it? We can’t even agree on movies anymore.
Article 10-5 is bad policy, and it’s taken less than a year in effect to prove it’s ineffectiveness and political weaponization.