stand up, for the ones who’s unwilling to be slave
Restore political balance. Let California Republicans become a balancing power. One party system is scary.
Democrats marginalize Republicans by calling them racists. They take minorities for granted to push their anti working people programs. An elitist agenda cloaked under the religious global warming fanatisicsm
California’s non-partisan Legislative Analysts Office (LAO) today said that Proposition 10, the ballot measure that repeals the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, including protections for tenants and single-family home owners, could cost local governments up to “tens of millions of dollars per year” in new costs and the state could lose up to “hundreds of millions of dollars per year” in revenues.
In the analysis, the LAO noted that the value of rental housing would decline and that rental units also would likely be sold and no longer be available for rentals. This, say experts, would work California’s affordable housing crisis even worse.
In addition, the LAO predicts: “If many localities enacted strong rent control legislation, other economic effects (such as impacts on housing construction) also could occur.”
If Prop 10 passes, no landlord would make these 35k offers
Can prop 10 be modified yo exclude vacancy control before ballot or is it late now?
Too late, no changes can be made.
Prop 10 is a $35k robbery from tenant
If Prop 10 passes Russian evictions will become popular. Bullet in the back of the head left in a ditch.
All proposition 10 does is remove the costa hawkins language:
wether vacancy decontrol kicks in or not depends on the city or county and their local laws. Some cities have legacy rent control laws that may be applicable for post 1995 housing, but they may or may not have vacancy decontrol on the books. However, if prop 10 passes, there is nothing preventing cities/counties from passing new rent control legislation with vacancy decontrol as part of the new legislation.
So effectively you need 2 steps. Prop 10 needs to pass, then the city or county in question will need to follow up and pass new rent control legislation that includes vacancy decontrol.
Better to head it off by stopping prop 10 in in it’s infancy, but it’s not the end of the world if it passes as you then have 2 paths - fight prop 10 in courts while also fighting any further action from cities and counties.
Some cities would be more stupid than others. Don’t underestimate the stupidity of the commies.
Someone told me Karl Marx is a genius. Is it correct? Did he have more impact in Germany or Russia?
Many commies do nothing but thinking all day long. Be aware, be fearful!
Let me play the devil’s advocate here. Tenants have right too. They agree to provide you a steady stream of income in return for a place to live. You agree to maintain the property. They can expect
to get reasonable terms from you when the lease is up. Your fixed costs go up a little bit. Property taxes go up 2% a year(not total fixed costs but only the property tax part of it) and the rest of the costs go up roughly the amount of inflation.
Now landlords who raise the rent 15% a year because they can get it are the problem. That’s why you have all the calls for rent control. Yes, your tenants can move out if they don’t like it but moving is a big hassle, and who’s to say they won’t be hit with the same big increase next year at their new place. I know that there are many responsible landlords on this forum, but it only takes a few greedy ones to start rent control laws.
Nothing really priced at cost in the market. If there were no Pepsi or other soda, you bet Coke will raise its price to whatever the market will bear, and it won’t be the cost to make the beverage.
A functional market is supposed to fix any price gouging by bringing in more suppliers. More competition drives down prices. But we don’t have a functioning market. Few if any housing units are being built.
Something like Weiner’s proposal to FORCE cities to build housing is a great idea. We had too much democracy at the root level. Need more centralization up to the state level.
Deregulation. Deregulate. Deregulation.
Return the planning right to the owners. There would be too many houses.
California’s housing shortage is caused single handedly by over regulation.
Hand the planning commission to Trump, housing will be over supplied before his term is up
Most people, including home owners, are fine with zoning and other regulations. Most home owners are not landlords either. They could care less.
So given a choice of building more houses in their neighborhood, vs putting rent control on “greedy” landlords, most will choose the latter.
Then deregulate and ban people from planning other people’s land.
I bet if we allow everyone to “plan” other people’s kitchen, too many people would die.
If we have a cooking planning committee and cooking department, and update the cooking regulations every year based on scientific advancement and hospital research, nobody would be able to cook food with compliance to the cooking regulations. Then everyone will need to hire licensed cook for a boiled egg. Guess 33% of the people will die and 50% will go hunger.
We’ll send cooking inspectors and issue $1000 fine when people cook food with too much sugar or too little protein. We can jail the people for 6 months if they cook sugary food to 3 year old kid and make the kid overweight and be subject to 20 deadly diseases
Root of evil is California’s direct democracy, aka mob democracy. We allow crazy people put crazy initiatives on ballots, and amateur citizens who spend at most 2 minutes on each initiative, if that, vote on them once every 2 years.
There is no sunset to those initiatives either. Once voted in they are set in stone forever.
Citizens don’t think deeply on those issues, because that’s not their job. They don’t understand the constraints. If you do A then B, C up to Z are also affected. No nuances either. Everything is black and white.
It’s a miracle CA has come so far given how badly it’s been governed.
Absolutely agree, that tenants have rights. The problem is that some jurisdictions want to go beyond the contract termination date. Why on Earth is it ok to stop an owner from pricing whatever he/she wants after the contract has ended? Even worse, Jane Kim’s law for Fab 7x7 allows that tenant of yours to bring in someone who is not on the lease during that contract period that the tenant can hide behind for their rights, but the owner can’t?
You can ask your mom to move out of your house, but you have to provide low cost housing to your tenant for life. This is worse than communism.
Over Regulation is the evil