> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Untitled
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/042903-story/
- Published: 2003-04-29T15:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-23T02:06:17.000Z
- Author: Guest Author
- Tags: Real Estate & Housing, Santa Monica, #archive-import

There has been much in the news recently about local rent control laws, tenants and landlords. A new law passed in March now allows landlords to increase tenants’ rents if they are found to be using their rent-controlled apartments for something other than living full-time.

Many tenants at the Shores Apartments, the 17-story towers at the beach near Hill Street, will have to prove to City Hall officials that they are using their units as their primary residences or be forced to pay thousands of dollars more in rent. Some tenants admit they own property elsewhere and use the units as secondary residences or as offices. Some Shores residents pay as little $600 a month for the same size apartment as someone who pays $1,600.

So this week, Q-Line wants to know, “Is it fair for a person to own property or live somewhere else and still be able to secure a rent-controlled apartment in Santa Monica? Why or why not?”

Call (310) 285-8106 with your response before Thursday at 5 p.m. We’ll print them in Friday’s paper. Please limit your comments to a minute or less. It might help to think first about the wording of your response.

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 29, 2003.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/042903.pdf?ref=smdp.com)