By Tony Street Bend, Ore.
When asked about the allegation that there are a lot of “wealthy” tenants living in rent-controlled apartments, Santa Monicans For Renters’ Rights (SMRR) co-chair and co-founder Denny Zane said, “Such tenants are by far the exception” (SMDP Jan. 18, page 1).
Really, Mr. Zane? And you make this statement based on what empirical data? As far as I know, neither the Santa Monica Rent Control Board nor SMRR collects any specific tenant data relating to income. As a matter of fact, when I called the rent control board and asked why they don’t means test renters, their response was, “that was never part of the law.”
Let’s break down the facts based on 2000 census data provided on the city of Santa Monica Web site. 1) The median (not the average) family income in 2000 was $75,989. 2) The number of households earning over $150,000 per year doubled between 1990 and 2000. 3) In 1990 AND in 2000, about 70 percent of households were occupied by renters. Finally, we can look to the IRS for what is considered “wealthy.” According to the 2002 IRS figures, those who filed with an AGI of $92,663 or more are in the top 10 percent of earners. Those who filed with an AGI of $56,401 or more are in the top 25 percent of earners.
So, unless all the top 10, 15, or 20 percent of Santa Monica are living in houses north of Montana, it would seem that Mr. Zane’s statement that “wealthy” tenants are “by far the exception” is simply a lie.
Now Mr. Zane does make a good point that landlords do get to choose their tenants. And, as a landlord you’d expect that one would want the tenants most likely to pay rent on time, keep the apartment nice, and possibly even make upgrades using their own funds, since no landlord in his right mind would spend a dime more than he has to given the mandatory low rents.
The net result is that high-income people are living in these apartments. But wait. According to the statement of purpose in the Rent Control Charter Amendment, Article XVIII, the whole point of rent control is to keep rents affordable for “the poor, minorities, students, young families, and senior citizens,” not to provide cheap rent for the “wealthy.”
Maybe Mr. Zane can enlighten those of us who think rent control has been a colossal failure and has only served a small percentage of the Santa Monicans it purports to help.
On second thought, never mind. We’ll all probably feel better if we just continue to believe... go ahead, take another sip of your non-fat, no-foam latte and enjoy the weather.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on January 20, 2005. Read the original PDF.