HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - #32
Orozco, Norma
From:Nathaniel Greensides <mynci90@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, July 19, 2021 4:35 PM
To:eComment
Subject:City Council Agenda Item 32
Categories:Correspondence
Dear City Council Members,
As a tenant/renter in Santa Ana, I am against this idea. On the surface, this idea seems good: issue citations and
fines upon LLs who are so greedy that they rent out a garage or unpermitted rooms which are completely
uninhabitable for purposes of being considered a “residential unit”. To start, the amount of the fine as
equivalent to the median rent of a two bedroom unit in Santa Ana is rather arbitrary. Secondly, this policy does
nothing to ensure that the affected tenants actually have any protections or housing after said fine is imposed. It
fails to center the experience and needs of those who it purports to protect.
Additionally, it doesn’t actually fix the systemic issue at hand which is the fact that resource laden Landlords
have very little incentive (comparatively anyways) to act in good faith. Tenants, on the other hand, fork up an
ever increasing percentage of their income to ensure that their families have a roof over their heads, invest their
time and energies into their neighborhoods and communities, remain model tenants so as to not jeopardize their
housing, yet are still told that they have “no skin in the game” and as such are subjected to relatively easy
displacement by Landlords and their scummy attorneys.
Not owning property is hardly an affliction that only tenants face. If a property is financed, it is in fact not
owned by a Landlord. Yet Landlords and “property investors” constantly find ways to increase their debt
amounts via mortgages and financing agreements only to pass on the cost of said borrowed money onto the
people who actually create the value in the first place resulting in an ever inflating housing market.
I am certainly not suggesting that Landlords be allowed to rent out unsafe and uninhabitable units. Fines are
only one mechanism to deter bad actors from acting in illegal manners, but not the only one. And at worst may
result in further destabilization of communities. The issue of degraded housing quality and housing issues
period cannot solely be viewed from the viewpoint of the Landlords – in this example, the policy aims to
produce good behavior on the part of the landlords. Yet, while it may be true that those “good” landlords never
have to think about this seeing as they aren’t the bad actors which this policy centers, Tenants have no
protections in the scenario that supposed “good” landlords decide to act badly. Policies which reduce or remove
harm upon our community are best – especially in our City where harm is constantly re-inflicted by Landlords
who utilize unjust laws against tenants who are just trying to live, contribute, and exist. Ensuring protection and
stability for the most vulnerable of our community (not those who already have access to resources and wealth)
will work in everyone’s interests. This policy proposal may result in more harm than good. Thus I am against it.
Sincerely,
Nathaniel Greensides
Ward 3 resident (had to move out of Ward 5 recently unfortunately)
p.s. Median rent of a two bedroom in Santa Ana as of the time of writing this email according to
https://www.zumper.com/rent-research/santa-ana-ca is $2,295.00 per month. This is not enough to ensure that a
family can relocate if a Landlord were to retaliate against receiving these fines. In other words, LLs are happy
to pay the fines of $2,300 because state laws exist which allow them to make up fake reasons to evict people
1
and rent at a higher rate to new tenants. And $2,300 is not gonna pay for a deposit (generally two months' rent
for unfurnished units - again this is allowed by state law) on top of the first month's rent on a new place coupled
with moving costs.
p.p.s. If we were to argue that Tenants should somehow have enough in savings to be able to shoulder these
costs of relocation somehow and $2300 is just a cherry on top... why aren't we also holding landlords to this
same standard? If "investors" are so overleveraged on their properties that even a month or two of missed rent
puts them at risk of mortgage foreclosure (which isn't a process that takes place overnight btw... the LL might
even be able to short sell a property in a relatively quick time before the finance company can even file the case
in court...) or serious financial distress, then maybe this type of process shouldn't be allowed to exist.
2