Correspondence - #07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Orozco, Norma From:Nathaniel Greensides <mynci90@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 19, 2021 10:53 AM To:eComment Subject:Agenda Item 7 Dear City Council and the general public, I am a resident of ward 5 and I am in favor of this item. Below, I address some of the points made by some in opposition. Sincerely, Nathaniel Greensides “In every locale with rent control, the mobilehome resale prices are higher than before rent control, and those prices accelerate each year, often many times above the true value of the mobilehomes” The park owners/operators are suggesting here that owners of mobile homes shouldn’t be able to sell their mobilehomes for above market prices which is a weird assertion to put forth in my opinion. Their concern that “eventually, home prices will reach levels that put them out of buyers needing affordable housing” is moot. For current residents (i.e. not future residents), the need to purchase affordable home is superceded by the ability to remain a renter with stabilized rents (which can still increase, but with a ceiling – just like with the 2 percent property tax increase ceiling that landowners in California enjoy, or fixed rate mortgages). Additionally, without rent control, the reality for Santa Ana residents (at least those who are younger than 40 years old) has always held that “home prices \[have always been at\] levels that \[are unaffordable\]”. Because of exactly that reason, it is time to stabilize housing costs for low income renters of Santa Ana who have been here and want to remain. While it may be true that in the short term, lack of supply might (not “will”) price out young families or seniors looking for a new place to buy in Santa Ana, rent control does not inhibit increasing the supply of housing in the city. Any "young families or seniors" currently living in Santa Ana and living in a unit subject to rent stabilization will actually be in a better position to save at an even faster rate towards purchasing a place of their own than without rent stabilization. The only reason that Rent Control WILL price out future home buyers (not current renters) is if the supply of housing remains the same or decreases. “With rent control, there is no incentive for park owners and operators to improve communities” I’d argue the incentive is the same if not more with rent stabilization and Just Cause protections (i.e. rent control). The incentive even without rent control is actually pretty big: failing to maintain properties at a basic level will result in those properties falling apart and people losing their homes as well as the housing provider facing not only lost profits, but criminal penalties for willfully failing to adhere to basic health and safety regulations. The difference with Rent Stabilization, Just Cause, and any local agency in charge of enforcement (i.e. rent control) is accountability. Landlords who can prove that an increase above the maximum allowed yearly increase will actually go towards maintenance or improvements will be able to petition for adjustments above the maximum allowed increases. The levels of any incentives for park owners to improve communities remains unchanged. “As demonstrated by the hostilities expressed in your hearings, rent control pulls communities apart. It destroys any incentive that landlords and mobilehome \[park\] owners have to cooperate, dialogue, or work together to maintain and improve mobilehome parks as ‘communities’ and ‘neighborhoods’… you wouldn’t pass a law that so constricts other 1