The Deceptive, Shameful, Lucratively Funded War Against Rent Control In California and across the country, landlord groups are waging a disinformation campaign to squash efforts to make rent more affordable. By SOPHIE KASAKOVE October 18, 2018
\nOn August 24, the tenants of two buildings near the Hollywood Forever Cemetery in Los Angeles received letters from their landlord notifying them of a rent increase of over $800 a month. The increase was not a result of repairs or tax increases but rather, the letter said, of the upcoming election in November.
\nMOST POPULAR The Backlash to the GOP\u2019s Union-Bashing Has Begun in Earnest It\u2019s Time for a New Voting Rights Act Facebook Betrayed America A Democrat Ran on Climate Change in a Republican Stronghold\u2014and Won The Punctured Myth of Sheryl Sandberg Like this article? Support our work. Subscribe today. The section of the ballot in question is Proposition 10, which, if it passes, would repeal a 1995 state law prohibiting local governments from enacting rent control on apartments and homes built after that year (or even earlier in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco). According to the letter: \u201cAlthough you don\u2019t want higher rent and we did not plan on charging you higher rent, we may lose our ability to raise rents in the future. … Therefore, in preparation for the passage of this ballot initiative we must pass along a rent increase today.\u201d If the ballot initiative failed, however, the landlord, Rampart Property Management, promised to \u201crevisit the rent increase with a desire to cancel it.\u201d
\nFor Maria (who prefers not to use her real name out of fear of retaliation by her landlord), waiting to find out was too big a risk. An immigrant from Guatemala, she pays $600 a month to share a bedroom with her 11-year-old son in a two-bedroom apartment\u2014another family lives in the second bedroom, with a fifth tenant taking the living room. A couple hundred dollars extra in rent would not be feasible for Maria, who lives off welfare after losing her job last year. A month later, Maria received a second letter billed as an \u201colive branch\u201d\u2014a reduction of the increase to $238 a month. When Maria and several other tenants went to the property manager to ask for an explanation, he told them that so many tenants had threatened to leave that the landlord had no choice but to lower the proposed rent hike.
\nAs the vote on rent control approaches, tenants across California have been harassed, served with eviction notices, and forced to pay more rent. In Concord, an entire building of 29 families was given 60-day eviction notices, with landlords explicitly citing Proposition 10 as the cause. In Modesto, tenants of a single-family building were not only notified of a rent increase, but also encouraged to vote against Prop 10, which the landlord said would \u201celiminat[e] the current availability of single family homes to rent.\u201d Shanti Singh of the California renters\u2019 rights organization Tenants Together says these are not isolated incidents: \u201cThis is punishing renters for participating in the democratic process. And we\u2019re expecting to see a lot more of this in the coming month.\u201d<\/p>\n
These efforts are part of a massive attack corporate landlords have been waging on rent control across the state. And though they claim to be speaking for the mom-and-pop landlords of California, the leaders of this campaign are some of the largest property owners in the country. Blackstone, the world\u2019s largest real estate management firm, has spent nearly $7 million to defeat Prop 10. Other top donors include Equity Residential, the third-largest apartment owner in the country, and AvalonBay Communities, the twelfth-largest property owner. These mostly Wall Street\u2013based moguls have pooled as much as $60 million (with as much as $2 million raised in the last week alone) primarily to fund an enormous advertising blitz, eclipsing the $22 million raised by the coalition of over 150 housing advocacy, community, political, and faith-based organizations that, along with the California Democratic Party, has rallied around the ballot initiative.
\nIf Proposition 10 passes, it would be not only the most significant attempt to roll back state limitations on rent control, but also the greatest success to date of the burgeoning national tenants\u2019 rights movement\u2014and real estate groups are responding with full force. Rent control, which is illegal in 27 states, has become a campaign issue across the country, and the landlord lobby has been rushing to squelch tenants\u2019 rights campaigns wherever they spring up.
\nGet the latest from TNR. Sign up for the newsletter. In Boston, a bill far more modest than Prop 10\u2014it was intended merely to track evictions and give the city a way to notify evicted tenants of their rights\u2014was killed in the state legislature this past May after landlord groups put pressure on lawmakers. In Oregon, the landlord lobby has already launched a multimillion dollar super PAC, More Housing Now!, to oppose an anticipated Prop 10\u2013like bill in the 2019 legislative session. In New York City in April, a proposal to freeze rents for nearly one million rent-stabilized apartments was defeated after the city\u2019s main trade group for residential landlords, the Rent Stabilization Association, reportedly spent over $1 million on lobbying in 2017.
\nTo owners, landlord groups seek to portray renters as poor, unpredictable, and conniving. A mailer sent out to condo owners across Boston by the Small Property Owners Association in 2017 warned owners that if tenant protection legislation were to pass, \u201c[d]isruptive renters will learn they can do anything with no consequences, no fines, no evictions.\u201d It added, \u201cUnevictable renters can pass their units & low rents on to their heirs. It never ends.\u201d
\nTo renters, real estate groups characterize rent control as anti-renter. In one recent ad, the executive director of the deceptively named California Council for Affordable Housing tells voters that Prop 10 will \u201cdrive up rents, take rental housing off the market, and make it harder to find a place to live.\u201d Amy Schur of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, one of the organizations leading the \u201cYes\u201d campaign on Prop 10, explains, \u201cThey are using that message because they read the same polls we read, which show that a majority of likely voters in California support rent control and want fast action to prevent rent gouging.\u201d A 2017 poll by the Institute of Governmental Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, found that 60 percent of likely voters in the state support rent control. In Oregon, a research firm this past May found that nearly two-thirds of those surveyed support expanding rent regulations.
\n The anti\u2013rent control rhetoric rests on the argument that rent control discourages developers from constructing new buildings, further aggravating housing shortages. But advocates say that landlord groups are blowing this threat out of proportion. Of all of the cities that have floated rent control legislation in the past few years, none have proposed extending rent control to include new construction. Even officials in Berkeley\u2014who have been some of the strongest proponents of rent control\u2014have proposed transitioning apartments into rent control on a rolling basis, exempting newly constructed buildings for 20 years. And, a report published out of University of Southern California last week shows that cities with rent stabilization ordinances for existing units have seen no decline in new construction.
\nStudies have indeed shown that rent control can affect existing housing stock\u2014but for reasons real estate groups avoid spelling out. By taking advantage of loopholes for averting rent control requirements, landlords end up pulling more properties from the rental market, converting rent-regulated apartments into condos and reducing the overall supply of affordable housing. While rent control advocates acknowledge these risks, they maintain that rent control is necessary as a stopgap measure for tenants facing eviction in an extremely hostile rental market. Even a widely cited recent paper highlighting the potential negative effects of rent control found that, of tenants in San Francisco, beneficiaries of rent control are between 10 and 20 percent more likely to have remained in the same apartment since 1994 and that \u201cabsent rent control essentially all of those incentivized to stay in their apartments would have otherwise moved out of San Francisco.\u201d
\nDespite these benefits, the real estate lobby\u2019s scare tactics appear to be working. A poll this week shows that 46 percent of likely voters oppose Proposition 10 and only 35 percent are in favor. \u201cWe are finding voters in our community who are crystal clear that they support rent control, and then say, \u2018So we should vote no on Prop 10, right?\u2019\u201d says Schur. In Mountain View, this summer, San Jose Inside reported that nearly 300 voters had been misled by paid signature-gatherers (some of whom said they were paid $40 per signature) into thinking that a rent control bill was pro-rent control, when in fact it aimed to repeal a rent control ordinance.
\nIn some ways this is an old story. \u201cThe mobilization of networks of local politicians and homeowners, the explicit use of race and class stereotypes, the references to renters as second-class citizens,\u201d says Tony Roshan Samara of Urban Habitat, a grassroots advocacy organization for low-income communities of color in the Bay Area. \u201cAll of this goes back to \u201830s, \u201840s, \u201850s. We\u2019re seeing the same politics of who gets to control land and who doesn\u2019t.\u201d
\nBut the scale of today\u2019s opposition campaign is a distinctly post\u2013financial crisis phenomenon, dictated by a race-to-the-bottom rental market. Since 2013, private equity firms like Blackstone have been purchasing tens of thousands of homes, converting them into rental properties, and bundling and securitizing them to create triple A\u2013rated \u201csingle-family rental bonds.\u201d Unlike \u201cmom-and-pop\u201d landlords, who tend to rely on a single-fixed rate loan from a bank, this new model relies on big investments from Wall Street investors, who expect firms to extract ever-higher returns from their tenants.
\n\u201cThe financialization of the rental housing market has had profound ramifications,\u201d explains Schur. \u201cThis is rip and run\u2014the Blackstones of the world are not investing long-term in our communities, they are extracting wealth from California to give to investors in the global financial market.\u201d The impact of legislation like Proposition 10 on a local landlord is nominal compared to the impact on a group like Blackstone, which has a portfolio of around 13,000 single-family rentals in California and a 40 percent stake in Invitation Homes, a property management group with another 13,000 homes in the state.
\nThe viability of this profit structure relies on a great degree of political intervention, not just in ballot initiatives, but also into elected offices across the country. In Oregon, filings from the secretary of state\u2019s office show that the More Housing Now! PAC and its member organizations have contributed thousands of dollars to help County Commissioner Loretta Smith defeat vocally pro-tenant candidate Jo Ann Hardesty for one of Portland\u2019s open city council seats. The PAC of the California Apartment Association, one of the groups behind the No on Prop 10 campaign, was among the top donors to the campaigns of incumbent candidates in four different city council districts in Sacramento, all four of whom won reelection. And there\u2019s likely far more money flowing behind the scenes: In 2015, the Mountain View Voicereported that the California Apartment Association had quietly funneled $90,000 to three city council candidates opposed to rent control through a PAC called Neighborhood Empowerment Coalition.
\nFor tenant advocates working to advance rent control across the country, these tactics haven\u2019t come as a big surprise. \u201cEveryone expected to be out-funded by the real estate industry. It\u2019s just standard practice, especially during a housing crisis, when rents are really high,\u201d says Singh of Tenants Together. This election may be the first where the landlord lobby\u2019s influence has emerged into full view, but as campaigns at all levels of government continue to embrace affordable housing as one of the most pressing domestic policy questions, it won\u2019t be the last.
\nSophie Kasakove is a reporter-researcher at The New Republic. Read MorePolitics, Housing New arguments. New insights. Get TNR’s latest every weekday.
\n Sign me up
\n Joe Raedle\/Getty Images The Backlash to the GOP\u2019s Union-Bashing Has Begun in Earnest After a string of attacks on organized labor across the Midwest in recent years, Republicans are starting to pay at the polls. By LAUREN KAORI GURLEY November 13, 2018
\nHas the Republican Party\u2019s grand experiment in union-busting finally come to an end? Scott Walker, the Republican governor of Wisconsin, rose to national prominence in 2011 when he passed a landmark bill dealing a blow to unions in the state and across the country. With Act 10, Walker stripped public workers of their right to collectively bargain, gutting their salaries, health care, and pensions. He then survived a vigorous recall effort, which featured 100,000 protesters storming the capitol rotunda in downtown Madison.
\nWalker was the face of an anti-union movement championed by Republicans and backed by libertarian financiers like the Koch brothers. But seven years later, in the midst of an ostensibly booming state economy, Walker narrowly lost his reelection bid on November 6\u2014and he was not the only anti-union gubernatorial candidate to go down this election season.
\nThe defeat of Walker in Wisconsin, as well as Bill Schuette in Michigan, Bruce Rauner in Illinois, and Kris Kobach in Kansas, is evidence that union-bashing politicians are finding it difficult to appeal to workers in a humming economy, which would otherwise seem to validate their claims that low wages and right-to-work laws have unleashed the prosperity-making powers of the market. In fact, national support for unions is at 62 percent, a 15-year high, with particular muscle in the Midwest, and among women and millennials. \u201cThere\u2019s a sense in which Scott Walker and his ilk have overplayed their hand,\u201d said Lane Windham, the associate director of the labor center at Georgetown University. \u201cPeople understand that unions counterbalance corporate power, and corporations are too powerful..\u201d
\nThis was not the sense observers had two years ago when Donald Trump outperformed past Republican presidential candidates with union households and carried a string of states that formed the backbone of the old industrial Midwest. But his message\u2014hostile to both trade and immigrants\u2014went against the grain of Koch-style economic orthodoxy. While certain working class voters did gravitate toward Trump, the midterm election results in Wisconsin and elsewhere suggest that they have not been convinced by his party\u2019s economic agenda and may even have soured on Trump himself. According to a Reuters-Ipsos poll released earlier this year, Trump\u2019s support among union voters has fallen 15 points.
\n Many voters living under Republican leadership are reacting to stagnant wages and the rise of underemployment. (Despite working fewer hours than they would prefer, underemployed workers get counted as \u201cemployed\u201d in official statistics.) In 2011, when Amy Mizialko, president of the Milwaukee teacher\u2019s union, first checked her pay stub online after Act 10 passed, she broke into tears. \u201cThose cuts were devastating,\u201d said Mizialko, who took a $10,000 cut in wages and benefits in the first year alone. Since the passage of Act 10, membership in Wisconsin\u2019s largest teacher\u2019s unionplummeted from 98,000 to 32,000. Once the progressive heart of the labor movement in the United States, Wisconsin saw its union membership drop 46 percent between 2011 and 2017.
\nWhile Walker\u2019s campaign underscoredWisconsin\u2019s 3 percent unemployment rate (below the national average), workers in the state were fighting to find enough work and wages remained low. At $7.25 an hour, Wisconsin\u2019s minimum wage has not budged since Walker took office seven years ago. And because of Act 10, many teachers and government workers\u2014disproportionately women and African Americans\u2014have had to find additional sources of income. \u201cIn Wisconsin, people are working three or four jobs,\u201d said Mizialko. \u201cThey are driving Uber. They\u2019re delivering groceries. They\u2019re picking up jobs at the state fair. They\u2019re just stitching together little stints of work to make ends meet for their families.\u201d
\nGet the latest from TNR. Sign up for the newsletter. They also bristled at Walker\u2019s cozy relationship with big business. In July 2017, he pledged $4.5 billion in state tax credits for the Taiwanese manufacturing giant FoxConn to build a state-of-the-art plant outside of Kenosha that promised to bring 13,000 jobs to the area. But as David Dayen wrote last week in The New Republic, the FoxConn deal has been a disaster and was an important factor in Walker\u2019s fall. The subsidy is the largest to a foreign corporation in U.S. history, and it comes at an enormous cost to taxpayers. Most of the subsidy will be delivered to FoxConn in direct cash payments\u2014at an estimated 18,000 in tax dollars per Wisconsin household.
\nWalker was among a handful of Republican governors\u2014including Rauner, Rick Snyder in Michigan, Eric Greitens in Missouri, and Mitch Daniels in Indiana\u2014who transformed the Midwest with their ideas about small government, austerity, and free market solutions. The Koch brothers\u2019 Americans for Prosperity initiative (AFP) poured millions of dollars into the region to pass legislation that would hobble unions and freeze minimum wages. Meanwhile, gerrymandering and new voter restrictions that favor conservatives prevented voters from overturning those laws at the polls\u2014with the exception of the upset victory of a proposition that repealed right-to-work in Missouri in August.
\nOver the past decade, this right-wing alliance has reshaped the Midwest by decimating private and public sector unions. Right-to-work laws, which drastically undercut union power in the private sector, have passed in Michigan, Missouri, Indiana, Kentucky, and Wisconsin since 2012. Public sector unions underwent similar attacks in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Michigan. Such laws make union dues optional, thereby draining unions of the funds they need to fight for workers. Workers in right-to-work states earn $1,558 less on average per year than similar workers in non-right-to-work states. When right-to-work passed under Rick Snyder in Michigan in 2012, Americans for Prosperity hailed the legislation \u201cas the shot heard around the world for workplace freedom.\u201d
\n The passage of right-to-work laws has gone hand-in-hand with declining support for the Democratic Party in the Midwest. Until Trump\u2019s victory in 2016, Michigan and Wisconsin had not elected a Republican president since the 1980s. \u201cUnions have a long history of turning out Democratic voters,\u201d said Windham, the labor expert from Georgetown. \u201cWithout unions to promote a working-class agenda, people are left to listen to right-wing radio. We have to think about that to understand what happened in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in 2016.\u201d
\nBut there is also a strong feeling that the Democratic Party has lost touch with its union roots, allowing a supposed populist like Trump to make inroads with working voters. That is starting to change, thanks in no small part to the wake-up call delivered by the 2016 election, which made it clear that Democrats cannot take those voters for granted. But there are other reasons some Democrats are re-embracing union politics, including a wave of teacher strikes in West Virginia, Oklahoma, Arizona, Kentucky, and Colorado that galvanized voters this year, as well as a growing realization that the face of union membership has changed, from the white industrial worker of the past century to a diverse coalition of women, immigrants, and minorities working in industries like hospitality, telecommunications, nursing, and media.
\nIronically, low employment across the Midwest gives workers the upper hand. Last year saw a slight uptick in union membership in the United States. Employers are eager to retain and hire workers, giving workers leverage to form and expand unions. Alongside fresh leadership, this provides an opportunity for workers to stage strikes, form unions, and restore the rights they have lost.
\nThe backlash to the GOP\u2019s anti-union efforts is also producing tangible results. Voters in Michigan elected Gretchen Whitmer as governor with the backing of the state\u2019s unions. In Illinois, voters ousted the union-busting Republican incumbent Rauner, who vetoed a $15 minimum wage bill and fought to pass right-to-work laws. \u201cI think the public perception of unions is getting better each and every day. We are seeing young people responding very well to unions,\u201d said Stephanie Bloomingdale, president of the Wisconsin AFL-CIO. In Missouri\u2019s August referendum on the state\u2019s right-to-work laws, a full 65 percent of voters opted to overturn them.
\nStill, rebuilding the labor movement in the Midwest will be a herculean task. Although the majority of Americans say they support unions, only 11 percent of U.S. workers belonged to unions in 2017. \u201cA defeat of Walker is a major victory,\u201d said Nelson Lichtenstein, a history professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara, \u201cbut there is much ideological and organizational work to be done before liberalism and unionism are once again joined at the hip.\u201d
\nRead MorePolitics, Labor, Scott Walker, Wisconsin, Donald Trump, Eric Greitens, Rick Snyder, Mitch Daniels, Bruce Rauner, Kris Kobach, Koch Brothers Follow us.
\nCopyright 2018 \u00a9 The New Republic. All rights reserved. : <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Deceptive, Shameful, Lucratively Funded War Against Rent Control In California and across the country, landlord groups are waging a disinformation campaign to squash efforts to make rent more affordable. By SOPHIE KASAKOVE October 18, 2018 On August 24, the tenants of two buildings near the Hollywood Forever Cemetery in Los Angeles received letters from […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-housingarchive"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=63"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dcfeedback.com\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}