By Louis Eisenstein Los Angeles
Bill Bauer manipulates the truth and hides the great benefits of Prop. 98 for all classes of people in California (“Proposition 98 is a nightmare,” page 4, March 24).
Prop. 98 is merely designed to protect private property owners barring government to forcibly seize their property and hand it to another private owner. Prop. 98 is not stopping eminent domain in which the government transfers the property for government use. Private property rights are a cornerstone of any democracy, which is why 42 states have already passed laws very similar to Prop. 98. Ask any of those mom-and-pop owners if they believe eminent domain protection has been a nightmare, I doubt they’ll say yes.
Regarding rent control, Prop. 98 will not abolish rent control, it will only phase it out over many years. Right now, if a tenant leaves a rent control unit, the landlord has the right to put it back on the market at market rents. Prop. 98 only will stop that vacant unit from being under the same draconian rent control laws that actually hinder affordable housing, which cause the middle-class in L.A. to leave.
Due to rent control, any new resident in Santa Monica or in any rent-controlled city such as L.A. and West Hollywood must pay higher rent for their unit in order to off-set the ridiculously low rents paid by the rent control units. Sorry folks, the landlord is running a business and if he doesn’t have enough income he won’t be able to pay for things like repairs, maintenance issues, insurance, water, etc. That is why rent control buildings with low paying tenants are often run-down and unkempt. If the government truly cared for seniors on fixed incomes or working class families, then the government should find solutions on their dime, but not on the mom-and-pop’s dime. Prop. 98 is taking the extra step to insure that tenants under rent control right now will never have to worry about losing that right. Many Prop. 98 critics often use scare tactics to make voters think this will eliminate rent control, it simply won’t.
The article also stated that private-to-private eminent domain helps build affordable housing. This is totally incorrect. Private-to-private eminent domain has caused many cities across the state to build ultra-expensive condos and hotels on properties once used as homes, small middle class businesses, mom-and-pop stores, restaurants, and centers that give hope to poor and disenfranchised youth. If the government wanted to build more affordable housing, taking away small middle-class businesses and homes in order to build ultra-luxurious condos doesn’t seem like one of them. In fact, when more luxury condos and hotels are built, the middle-class leaves; leaving the city with two classes, the ultra-poor and the ultra-rich.
The article states Prop. 99 is a great alternative. Well guess who’s funding Prop. 99. The very same developers that are building condos and hotels for the ultra-rich. The supporters behind Prop. 99 have absolutely no interest in seeing affordable housing increase. The pockets of many of our city coun-cilmembers across the state are full of money from the luxury housing developers. Prop. 99 is a sick and perverted way of tricking people into thinking they are being helped.
If the government wants to see more affordable housing, there are many different paths to take. But the government should never have to take away homes and businesses so that the private developers can make their millions.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 3, 2008. Read the original PDF.