Long Beach will require landlords to compensate tenants who move out to avoid big ren

[sopas ej]

From Los Angeles Curbed:

Long Beach will require landlords to compensate tenants who move out to avoid big rent hikes

Tenants will get $2,706 to $4,500, depending on the size of their apartment
By Jenna Chandler@jennakchandler May 22, 2019, 11:11am PDT



Renters in Long Beach facing steep rent hikes will get a little lifeline.

Tenants who choose to move out when their rent is hiked more than 10 percent will get as much as $4,500 to help with moving expenses under a tenant relocation assistance ordinance finalized and approved on six-to-three vote by the Long Beach City Council on Tuesday night.

The decision was met with audible cheers from renters’ rights advocates in City Hall, who have pushed the council to help tenants hit with extreme rent increases.

“Relocation assistance is necessary, because tenants do not have the money to move,” Joshua Christian, with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, told the council. “My clients don’t have [thousands of dollars] for a security deposit and first and last month’s rent.”

The fees—which will be paid by landlords—will range from $2,706 to $4,500, depending on the number of bedrooms in the unit.

They are aimed at deterring landlords from evicting tenants, as Long Beach, much like the rest of the Los Angeles region, grapples with rising housing costs, sluggish wages, and a homelessness crisis.

“This is certainly a protection for tenants,” said Long Beach City Councilmember Lena Gonzalez.

The city, she said, has introduced plans for affordable housing and homeless shelters, only to have residents block them. “We’ve been told ‘no, not in our backyard,’” Gonzalez said. “This time we’re going to say ‘yes, yes in our backyard.’”

The cost of rent in the coastal city, where about 60 percent of residents are renters, has spiked 25.8 percent over the past five years (to an average of $1,418 for a one bedroom in February) as vacancy rates took a dive, according to a report from the city’s development services department. That has left many renters with fewer housing options.

[...]

Link: https://la.curbed.com/2019/5/22/1852...mKlsAqBaFuLsFc

[the urban politician]

Horrible idea, and illegal

But I'm sure the activist courts will find a deceptive way to rule this nonsense Constitutional

[xzmattzx]

Isn't moving out how you stick it to a landlord?

Landlords will find a way around this anyway. A policy like this will force landlords to spread the increases out across more years. So if/when the economy begins to go back down, landlords will continue to raise the rent to make up for when they could not raise it as much when the market dictated it. Then we'll get an article about how something has to be done to keep landlords from raising rent when the economy is slow.

[sopas ej]

I don't know if you guys read the rest of the article, but I think this seems fair:

Tenants will be eligible for relocation assistance in three scenarios:


- When their rent increases 10 percent or more in a 12-month period.

- When their landlord issues a notice to vacate in order to rehabilitate the unit.

- If they’re in “good standing” but receive an eviction notice. To be in good standing, a tenant has to have lived in the unit for more than one year and be current on rent, among other things.


Renters in single-family homes, duplexes, and triplexes, and some fourplexes will not be eligible, exemptions that were designed to help mom and pop landlords.

You've got to be a big asshole landlord if you're gonna raise the rent 10% or more within a 12-month period, right?

[xzmattzx]

So they'll raise it 9% each year. Then what?

[lio45]

Wow, Long Beach landlords (and presumably, all other California landlords) are lucky to be able to actually raise rents! A few grand is a small price to pay for that privilege.

[ChrisLA]

Okay, where did they get this picture from, it was taken from the top floor of my old condo I used to live in. Stange coincidence, I do miss living so close to the beach.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

You've got to be a big asshole landlord if you're gonna raise the rent 10% or more within a 12-month period, right?

^ For argument's sake, what about when a Landlord's costs went up more than 10% in a year?

Once again, we focus with heavy scrutiny at one person, the landlord, without consideration for the several third party entities that (s)he is dealing with (taxing bodies, municipal water and trash, repair men, cost of new appliances, electric, gas bills). It is totally possible for a landlord's "cost of ownership" to go up by 10% in 1 year.

[the urban politician]

What will end up happening is that landlords will simply raise the rent by 9.99%

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

What will end up happening is that landlords will simply raise the rent by 9.99%

Beat me to it. This was my initial thought!

They could also enact higher deposits and increase one time fees, like an "administration fee" to file the paper work, "pet rent", "parking fee" etc etc etc.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Once again, we focus with heavy scrutiny at one person, the landlord, without consideration for the several third party entities that (s)he is dealing with (taxing bodies, municipal water and trash, repair men, cost of new appliances, electric, gas bills). It is totally possible for a landlord's "cost of ownership" to go up by 10% in 1 year.

This is California. Prop 13 also covers commercial properties.

New appliances? Again, this is California. Many renters have to buy their own stoves and refrigerators. In fact, my partner and I lucked out in that when we moved into our apartment, the previous tenant left their stove and refrigerator there so we were able to use them---for a number of years, anyway. After the refrigerator died, we had to buy our own new one.

And in large apartment complexes, tenants move out and new ones move in all the time. They can charge market value (or more) to the new tenants that move in. Again, if you read the whole article, "Renters in single-family homes, duplexes, and triplexes, and some fourplexes will not be eligible, exemptions that were designed to help mom and pop landlords."

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

This is California. Prop 13 also covers commercial properties.

New appliances? Again, this is California. Many renters have to buy their own stoves and refrigerators. In fact, my partner and I lucked out in that when we moved into our apartment, the previous tenant left their stove and refrigerator there so we were able to use them---for a number of years, anyway. After the refrigerator died, we had to buy our own new one.

Good point.

Nearly all of my investing is in Chicago, but I do own 1 rental property in California, which is a home and some land around it.

The guy who is my tenant is mostly using the space to grow marijuana, so in a sense at least some of my income is drug money....

Anyhow, you are correct about the culture being different out there.

Here in Chicago, however, appliances are almost always provided by the landlord, and property taxes are a huge issue. In addition, because of our winters and the age of our buildings here, maintenance costs are high.

So this Long Beach 10% policy could certainly be an issue out here. That's probably why there was such a HUGE local pushback against rent control

[Buckeye Native 001]

Originally Posted by ChrisLA

Okay, where did they get this picture from, it was taken from the top floor of my old condo I used to live in. Stange coincidence, I do miss living so close to the beach.

I thought that intersection looked familiar...

[EastSideHBG]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

New appliances? Again, this is California. Many renters have to buy their own stoves and refrigerators. In fact, my partner and I lucked out in that when we moved into our apartment, the previous tenant left their stove and refrigerator there so we were able to use them---for a number of years, anyway. After the refrigerator died, we had to buy our own new one.

That is really annoying and the logistics of that must be a nightmare.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by EastSideHBG

That is really annoying and the logistics of that must be a nightmare.

Every renter here owns their own fridge, stove, washer, dryer.

On Moving Day (July 1st of every year), countless numbers of appliances travel from one apartment to another.

I thought that's how everyone did it (on both counts), until I started investing in the US and realized that 1) they can move anytime in the year, and that 2) appliances are part of the properties instead of being tenant furniture.

Now that I'm familiar with both, I can say I greatly prefer the American way. Makes more sense too. (Less needless appliance moving.)

[EastSideHBG]

Originally Posted by lio45

Every renter here owns their own fridge, stove, washer, dryer.

On Moving Day (July 1st of every year), countless numbers of appliances travel from one apartment to another.

I thought that's how everyone did it (on both counts), until I started investing in the US and realized that 1) they can move anytime in the year, and that 2) appliances are part of the properties instead of being tenant furniture.

Now that I'm familiar with both, I can say I greatly prefer the American way. Makes more sense too. (Less needless appliance moving.)

I know that the construction is much newer overall in comparison to this side of the country but don't folks run into the issue of appliances not fitting in the new place? Here it would be a nightmare to do this, as thinking back on all of the places I have rented NONE had the same setup and all required different sized appliances.

[JManc]

The only places I've ever seen where appliances are included are apartment complexes. Flats and homes for rent usually require renters to bring their own.

[mhays]

Wouldn't "homes" include apartments?

[Doady]

Horrible idea, and illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[Sun Belt]

Originally Posted by Doady

Horrible idea, and illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

It might not be UNCONSTITUTIONAL, but some might call it a CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS!!! Lol.