Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Richmond progressives respond to CAA petition blocking renter protections
On September 11, RPA member Mike Parker said: “The filing of petitions to suspend the City’s rent control/just cause ordinance does not stop the need for tenant protections in a city where almost half the residents live in rented housing!"
Richmond progressives respond to CAA petition blocking renter protections
By Lynda Carson - September 14, 2015
Richmond - In response to the California Apartment Association (CAA) petition that many citizens complained about because they were lied to, and tricked into signing the petition by signature gatherers, Richmond Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin and Mike Parker, both being members of the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA), have made statements in regards to the CAA backed petition that blocked renter protections from going into effect on September 4.
Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin said: “As many of you know, three specific Richmond-related petitions were circulated for signatures in our city recently. They were turned into our City Clerk's office earlier this month. The signatures are currently being reviewed in the Contra Costa Elections Office to determine whether or not they have sufficient qualifying signatures.”
“One of the petitions refers to the Richmond City Manager's salary, another refers to a development project in Richmond, and the third petition refers to Rent Control/Just Cause for Eviction in Richmond. I will continue to update you as the process of reviewing these petitions continues.”
Additionally, in a statement from RPA member Mike Parker called; “RPA Statement on Petition to Block Rent Control & Just Cause for Eviction.”
On September 11, RPA member Mike Parker said: “The filing of petitions to suspend the City’s rent control/just cause ordinance does not stop the need for tenant protections in a city where almost half the residents live in rented housing.
Despite statements by City officials that the filing suspends the ordinance, there is also legal opinion that the suspension does not take place until sufficient signatures are verified by the county, a process that may take up to 30 days.
If the signatures are verified, the ordinance will be suspended. The City Council will either repeal the ordinance or schedule it for a referendum vote, although it is not required to decide immediately. The coalition of community organizations that have been backing rent control will make recommendations to the City Council about next steps.
We wish to emphasize that this petition has been an abuse of the elections system. First, the petition was circulated without the sponsoring organization being known. Only after the petitions were filed was the role of the California Apartment Association revealed.
Second, the system of allowing paid signature gatherers already biases the initiative/referendum process in favor of wealthy persons or corporations. In this case the signature drive only succeeded because gatherers were paid three to six times normal rates. When rates jumped up to $12.50 per signature and in some cases a reported $20.00 per signature, petition gatherers from around the state converged on Richmond. The high rates encouraged gatherers to say anything to get a signature. We have many cases documented where potential signers were told that this petition would favor or strengthen rent control.
What this means is that any well financed organization or individuals can suspend any ordinance in the city during the month after passage if they have$100,000 to spend. This is in the same spirit as the Citizens United decision that allows money to control our politics.
“We continue to believe that Bay Area gentrification and displacement are threats to Richmond. We believe a variety of policies must be followed to increase the supply of affordable housing. We believe that renters should have rights and that they are an important part of our city. We believe that stabilizing rental prices and establishing just cause for evictions, which is what the ordinance did, is critical to stabilizing our neighborhoods. Stable neighborhoods are critical to achieving safety, good schools, and strong organizations that benefit everybody in the community.”
Mike Parker, On behalf of the RPA Steering Committee.
In a statement by Tenant advocate Larry Gross, executive director of the Coalition for Economic Survival based in Los Angeles, in an article of today's Nonprofit Quarterly, Larry Gross said. “More typical forms of landlord advocacy come through the state legislature or by bringing litigation, two venues where money speaks louder than votes. The landlords still have enormous influence in Sacramento and most cities in California.”
“It’s all about money and the ability to line the coffers of campaign war chests. That money buys influence. They have also, for the most part, not been successful at the ballot box. Best recent example is was in 2008 with Proposition 98, which they placed on the statewide ballot as an anti-eminent domain measure, but which would, in fact, have wiped out all rent control and tenants’ rights laws in California. They spent millions on it and we crushed it with a 2-to-1 vote victory.”
Click on link below to September 14, Nonprofit Quarterly story.
http://tinyurl.com/o26jhxd
Click on links below about Proposition 98, the landlords attempt to kill renter protections.
Prop 98 would eliminate rent control and tenant protections
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/04/13/18492623.php
Prop 98, is Fueled by Avarice and Greed
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/prop-98-fueled-avarice-and-greed
The California Apartment Association (CAA) Hijacked Renter Protections In Richmond
The California Apartment Association (CAA) hijacked renter protections in Richmond with BIG MONEY, by financially backing a petition intended to block rent control and just cause eviction protections from going into effect on September 4, 2015. A petition, that many were tricked into signing by devious signature gatherers who were being payed anywhere from $12.50 to $20.00 per signature, according to numerous reports. Devious signature gatherers who lied to people by telling them that the petition made rent control stronger, or kept rents from increasing, according to testimony from renters, and according to media reports.
Most unseemly, the CAA has been bragging about the way renter protections have been hijacked from Richmond’s renters.
Click below for details.
http://caanet.org/caa-petition-puts-brakes-on-richmond-rent-control/
By meddling in the affairs of Richmond’s city government, the CAA has managed to block rent control and just cause eviction protections from going into effect on September 4, 2015.
What the CAA has done is more than meddle in the affairs of Richmond as an extreme annoyance to city government. The CAA has crushed the hopes and dreams of families with children, disabled and elderly members, including school teachers, nurses, low-wage workers, and thousands of other citizens in Richmond seeking protection from greedy landlords, realtors, speculators, and apartment owners.
Many are long-term residents who turned to their elected officials and lobbied them for assistance, to stop families from being displaced from their community. They are seeking nothing more than a fair deal through rent control, and just cause eviction protections, as a way to keep from being displaced, or made homeless, as long as they pay their rent, and are not in breach of their contracts, or a just cause eviction protection ordinance.
They are trying to avoid becoming victims of the eviction-for profit-system. An inhumane system imposed by the California Apartment Association (CAA) and it’s 13,000 members including greedy landlords, realtors, speculators, and apartment owners.
The CAA Is Meddling In The Affairs Of San Mateo
Recently, the California Apartment Association (CAA) may have lied to its 13,000 members as part of the scheme to pressure the City Council of San Mateo to stall efforts to pass emergency just cause eviction protections.
Tuesday evening, September 8, after being pressured by the CAA and CAA Tri-County and it’s members, the council blocked a proposal by Councilman David Lim that was supported by Councilman Rick Bonilla. The emergency just cause eviction protection ordinance that would have slowed down the displacement and possible homelessness of the elderly, disabled, low-income, and working class renters, including veterans in San Mateo, would need to be voted on September 21, if passed by the council.
Councilman David Lim and other council members have been targeted by the CAA and CAA Tri-County for proposing a just cause eviction protection ordinance to keep families from being displaced by unfair and unjust no-cause evictions in San Mateo. This is known as the
eviction-for profit-system.
Click on link below…
http://caanet.org/tag/councilmember-david-lim/
On September 8, Council Member Lim was expected to introduce an emergency just cause ordinance to be voted on. If the City Council approved the proposal the item would have moved forward to the September 21 public hearing. The ordinance would have officially been
voted on then by the council, but was stalled after the council was pressured by the members of the CAA, and CAA Tri-County.
The 13,000 member California Apartment Association CAA, and CAA Tri-County is meddling in the affairs of San Mateo, and opposes renter protections in San Mateo, and everywhere else throughout California. As usual, the CAA trotted out the same baseless reasons that lack any
validity, and they demand the issue be studied further as a way to block the renter protections from becoming the law of the land.
Meanwhile, tens of thousands of renters throughout California and San Mateo continue to be displaced and made homeless, while the wealthy landlords bank accounts get fatter by the moment with the eviction-for profit-system.
The CAA may have lied to its members to get them out in force to oppose renter protections in San Mateo.
On the CAA website it states that if passed, the just cause eviction protection ordinance would apply to all rental housing in San Mateo regardless of type, size, or year it was built.
However, according to a September 5 article by The Daily Journal, "The ordinance would not apply to certain property owners, such as those who live on site and share use of a kitchen or bathroom — as in the case of a single-family home — or apartments with less than three
units with the landlord residing on site as well."
Click on link below for details showing that the CAA may have lied to its very own members to frighten them into opposing renter protections in San Mateo, by claiming the just cause eviction protection ordinance would apply to all rental housing regardless of type, size, or year it
was built.
http://caanet.org/tag/councilmember-david-lim/
Now, click on the link below for The Daily Journal article that states: "The ordinance would not apply to certain property owners, such as those who live on site and share use of a kitchen or bathroom — as in the case of a single-family home — or apartments with less
than three units with the landlord residing on site as well."
Click on link below…
http://tinyurl.com/ouoh7wb
Seeing how the CAA may have lied to it’s “VERY OWN MEMBERS” to frighten them into opposing renter protections in San Mateo, it all sounds vaguely familiar of all the citizens complaints in Richmond, who testified recently, and claimed that they were tricked and lied to
by the supporters of the CAA into signing a petition to oppose renter protections in Richmond.
See a few links below…
Lynda Carson may be reached at tenantsrule [at] yahoo.com
A peak at CAA the nonprofit that stole Richmond’s renters protections
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/09/07/18777219.php
Click below for more on Renter protections in Richmond
http://tinyurl.com/p52llcr
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
By Lynda Carson - September 14, 2015
Richmond - In response to the California Apartment Association (CAA) petition that many citizens complained about because they were lied to, and tricked into signing the petition by signature gatherers, Richmond Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin and Mike Parker, both being members of the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA), have made statements in regards to the CAA backed petition that blocked renter protections from going into effect on September 4.
Councilmember Gayle McLaughlin said: “As many of you know, three specific Richmond-related petitions were circulated for signatures in our city recently. They were turned into our City Clerk's office earlier this month. The signatures are currently being reviewed in the Contra Costa Elections Office to determine whether or not they have sufficient qualifying signatures.”
“One of the petitions refers to the Richmond City Manager's salary, another refers to a development project in Richmond, and the third petition refers to Rent Control/Just Cause for Eviction in Richmond. I will continue to update you as the process of reviewing these petitions continues.”
Additionally, in a statement from RPA member Mike Parker called; “RPA Statement on Petition to Block Rent Control & Just Cause for Eviction.”
On September 11, RPA member Mike Parker said: “The filing of petitions to suspend the City’s rent control/just cause ordinance does not stop the need for tenant protections in a city where almost half the residents live in rented housing.
Despite statements by City officials that the filing suspends the ordinance, there is also legal opinion that the suspension does not take place until sufficient signatures are verified by the county, a process that may take up to 30 days.
If the signatures are verified, the ordinance will be suspended. The City Council will either repeal the ordinance or schedule it for a referendum vote, although it is not required to decide immediately. The coalition of community organizations that have been backing rent control will make recommendations to the City Council about next steps.
We wish to emphasize that this petition has been an abuse of the elections system. First, the petition was circulated without the sponsoring organization being known. Only after the petitions were filed was the role of the California Apartment Association revealed.
Second, the system of allowing paid signature gatherers already biases the initiative/referendum process in favor of wealthy persons or corporations. In this case the signature drive only succeeded because gatherers were paid three to six times normal rates. When rates jumped up to $12.50 per signature and in some cases a reported $20.00 per signature, petition gatherers from around the state converged on Richmond. The high rates encouraged gatherers to say anything to get a signature. We have many cases documented where potential signers were told that this petition would favor or strengthen rent control.
What this means is that any well financed organization or individuals can suspend any ordinance in the city during the month after passage if they have$100,000 to spend. This is in the same spirit as the Citizens United decision that allows money to control our politics.
“We continue to believe that Bay Area gentrification and displacement are threats to Richmond. We believe a variety of policies must be followed to increase the supply of affordable housing. We believe that renters should have rights and that they are an important part of our city. We believe that stabilizing rental prices and establishing just cause for evictions, which is what the ordinance did, is critical to stabilizing our neighborhoods. Stable neighborhoods are critical to achieving safety, good schools, and strong organizations that benefit everybody in the community.”
Mike Parker, On behalf of the RPA Steering Committee.
In a statement by Tenant advocate Larry Gross, executive director of the Coalition for Economic Survival based in Los Angeles, in an article of today's Nonprofit Quarterly, Larry Gross said. “More typical forms of landlord advocacy come through the state legislature or by bringing litigation, two venues where money speaks louder than votes. The landlords still have enormous influence in Sacramento and most cities in California.”
“It’s all about money and the ability to line the coffers of campaign war chests. That money buys influence. They have also, for the most part, not been successful at the ballot box. Best recent example is was in 2008 with Proposition 98, which they placed on the statewide ballot as an anti-eminent domain measure, but which would, in fact, have wiped out all rent control and tenants’ rights laws in California. They spent millions on it and we crushed it with a 2-to-1 vote victory.”
Click on link below to September 14, Nonprofit Quarterly story.
http://tinyurl.com/o26jhxd
Click on links below about Proposition 98, the landlords attempt to kill renter protections.
Prop 98 would eliminate rent control and tenant protections
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/04/13/18492623.php
Prop 98, is Fueled by Avarice and Greed
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/prop-98-fueled-avarice-and-greed
The California Apartment Association (CAA) Hijacked Renter Protections In Richmond
The California Apartment Association (CAA) hijacked renter protections in Richmond with BIG MONEY, by financially backing a petition intended to block rent control and just cause eviction protections from going into effect on September 4, 2015. A petition, that many were tricked into signing by devious signature gatherers who were being payed anywhere from $12.50 to $20.00 per signature, according to numerous reports. Devious signature gatherers who lied to people by telling them that the petition made rent control stronger, or kept rents from increasing, according to testimony from renters, and according to media reports.
Most unseemly, the CAA has been bragging about the way renter protections have been hijacked from Richmond’s renters.
Click below for details.
http://caanet.org/caa-petition-puts-brakes-on-richmond-rent-control/
By meddling in the affairs of Richmond’s city government, the CAA has managed to block rent control and just cause eviction protections from going into effect on September 4, 2015.
What the CAA has done is more than meddle in the affairs of Richmond as an extreme annoyance to city government. The CAA has crushed the hopes and dreams of families with children, disabled and elderly members, including school teachers, nurses, low-wage workers, and thousands of other citizens in Richmond seeking protection from greedy landlords, realtors, speculators, and apartment owners.
Many are long-term residents who turned to their elected officials and lobbied them for assistance, to stop families from being displaced from their community. They are seeking nothing more than a fair deal through rent control, and just cause eviction protections, as a way to keep from being displaced, or made homeless, as long as they pay their rent, and are not in breach of their contracts, or a just cause eviction protection ordinance.
They are trying to avoid becoming victims of the eviction-for profit-system. An inhumane system imposed by the California Apartment Association (CAA) and it’s 13,000 members including greedy landlords, realtors, speculators, and apartment owners.
The CAA Is Meddling In The Affairs Of San Mateo
Recently, the California Apartment Association (CAA) may have lied to its 13,000 members as part of the scheme to pressure the City Council of San Mateo to stall efforts to pass emergency just cause eviction protections.
Tuesday evening, September 8, after being pressured by the CAA and CAA Tri-County and it’s members, the council blocked a proposal by Councilman David Lim that was supported by Councilman Rick Bonilla. The emergency just cause eviction protection ordinance that would have slowed down the displacement and possible homelessness of the elderly, disabled, low-income, and working class renters, including veterans in San Mateo, would need to be voted on September 21, if passed by the council.
Councilman David Lim and other council members have been targeted by the CAA and CAA Tri-County for proposing a just cause eviction protection ordinance to keep families from being displaced by unfair and unjust no-cause evictions in San Mateo. This is known as the
eviction-for profit-system.
Click on link below…
http://caanet.org/tag/councilmember-david-lim/
On September 8, Council Member Lim was expected to introduce an emergency just cause ordinance to be voted on. If the City Council approved the proposal the item would have moved forward to the September 21 public hearing. The ordinance would have officially been
voted on then by the council, but was stalled after the council was pressured by the members of the CAA, and CAA Tri-County.
The 13,000 member California Apartment Association CAA, and CAA Tri-County is meddling in the affairs of San Mateo, and opposes renter protections in San Mateo, and everywhere else throughout California. As usual, the CAA trotted out the same baseless reasons that lack any
validity, and they demand the issue be studied further as a way to block the renter protections from becoming the law of the land.
Meanwhile, tens of thousands of renters throughout California and San Mateo continue to be displaced and made homeless, while the wealthy landlords bank accounts get fatter by the moment with the eviction-for profit-system.
The CAA may have lied to its members to get them out in force to oppose renter protections in San Mateo.
On the CAA website it states that if passed, the just cause eviction protection ordinance would apply to all rental housing in San Mateo regardless of type, size, or year it was built.
However, according to a September 5 article by The Daily Journal, "The ordinance would not apply to certain property owners, such as those who live on site and share use of a kitchen or bathroom — as in the case of a single-family home — or apartments with less than three
units with the landlord residing on site as well."
Click on link below for details showing that the CAA may have lied to its very own members to frighten them into opposing renter protections in San Mateo, by claiming the just cause eviction protection ordinance would apply to all rental housing regardless of type, size, or year it
was built.
http://caanet.org/tag/councilmember-david-lim/
Now, click on the link below for The Daily Journal article that states: "The ordinance would not apply to certain property owners, such as those who live on site and share use of a kitchen or bathroom — as in the case of a single-family home — or apartments with less
than three units with the landlord residing on site as well."
Click on link below…
http://tinyurl.com/ouoh7wb
Seeing how the CAA may have lied to it’s “VERY OWN MEMBERS” to frighten them into opposing renter protections in San Mateo, it all sounds vaguely familiar of all the citizens complaints in Richmond, who testified recently, and claimed that they were tricked and lied to
by the supporters of the CAA into signing a petition to oppose renter protections in Richmond.
See a few links below…
Lynda Carson may be reached at tenantsrule [at] yahoo.com
A peak at CAA the nonprofit that stole Richmond’s renters protections
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/09/07/18777219.php
Click below for more on Renter protections in Richmond
http://tinyurl.com/p52llcr
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
Add Your Comments
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network