Corrupting Influence Of Big Money Weakens Rent Laws/Health & Safety Laws

Corrupting Influence Of Big Money Weakens Rent Laws/Health & Safety Laws

By Lynda Carson - October 21, 2015

Richmond - On the Consent Calendar for Tuesday, October 20, 2015, known as I-22, the Richmond City Council was expected to: “RECEIVE the Certificate of Sufficiency of Referendum Petition dated October 13, 2015, indicating that the referendum petition protesting the passage of Ordinance No. 21-15 N.S. -- amending Article XI of the Richmond Municipal Code to establish a rent control board and just cause requirement for evictions -- has a sufficient number of valid signatures for the ordinance to be suspended.”

This is the petition of the California Apartment Association (CAA) that blocked renter protections from going into effect on September 4, 2015, including rent control, and just cause eviction protections. Many Richmond voters complained about the petition and stated that they were tricked by signature gatherers into signing the petition, when they were told that the petition strengthened renter protections, which was not true.

Allegedly, the Contra Costa County Clerk Recorder-Elections Division did a random sampling of 500 signatures of which 389 of the 500 signatures were valid. This is all that they were required to do to claim that the petition was found to be sufficient, by using the formula approved by the Secretary of State to determine that the statistically projected number of valid signatures is 5,514, being enough valid signatures to to qualify for the ballot.

Click on link below for more about the petition that people were tricked into signing…

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/10/06/18778507.php


Click on link below for Consent Calendar item I-22.…

http://sireweb.ci.richmond.ca.us/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=617&doctype=AGENDA

Click on links below for more details…

http://tinyurl.com/q66ejoa

http://tinyurl.com/ogpctn8

http://tinyurl.com/qgzgtr5

Corrupting influence Of The CAA And Other Associations


The California Apartment Association (CAA) and it’s 13,000 members have been busy lately, using their power, influence, and big money to meddle in the affairs of cities in Northern California that have been considering renter protection ordinances, including the City of Richmond, Alameda, San Jose, San Mateo, Santa Rosa, and Mountain View.

In addition to the CAA’s attempts to sabotage efforts locally by the working class, and school teachers, construction workers, store clerks, city workers, union members, veterans, the elderly, disabled, tenant activists, and families with children, to have renter protections that will stop the abuse of greedy landlords, and realtors involved in the eviction-for profit-system, the CAA has been meddling in the affairs of the California Legislature. This is being done in the effort to weaken rent laws, and health and safety laws that affect renters throughout California.

New laws scheduled to take effect during 2016 in California, reveal that the corrupting influence of the CAA and other anti-tenant associations have been successful in weakening rent laws, and health and safety laws that tenants depend on.

According to the CAA, Senate Bill 655 sponsered by Holly J. Mitchell (Dem. Los Angeles): “As initially introduced, SB 655 would have added mold to the conditions that make housing substandard. The bill was amended at CAA’s request. It now provides that a landlord has no obligation to repair a dilapidation relating to visible mold until the owner has received notice of the mold problem. The bill also holds the tenant responsible for mold that is caused by the tenant’s poor housekeeping. Under the bill, a property cannot be declared substandard unless a code enforcement officer makes the identification that the visible mold exists to the extent that it endangers the occupants. A property owner is not responsible for mold that is minor and found on surfaces that can accumulate moisture as part of their properly functioning and intended use, such as bathroom showers and the like. Under current law, the term “any nuisance” found in the health and safety code is used by code enforcement and tenant attorneys to make claims against the property owner about mold in the housing and the conditions surrounding mold growth.”

With Senate Bill 655 that goes into effect in 2016, tenants can no longer higher an attorney that would bring in an inspector to document mold conditions in their housing, as a way to force a landlord to clean up the mold problems. Starting in 2016, tenants will have to file a complaint with the city or county they reside in, in an effort to try to get a code enforcement inspector to come by and claim that the visible mold exists to the extent that it endangers the occupants in that housing unit, before the landlord is responsible to remedy the mold situation. In cities or counties that have a weak corrupted code enforcement department, this may be a very daunting experience for renters, that may result in retaliation by the landlord.

In this case, the CAA has corrupted Senate Bill 655 to such extremes that they are exposing tenants to unhealthy mold problems, and are totally interfering in the tenant-lawyer relationship that currently exists, by making it much harder for the health and safety laws of California, to be enforced to protect tenants from criminal landlords and slumlords that allow mold to exist in their residential properties. Meanwhile, the unit may really be uninhabitable and the tenant may have to pay rent, while being exposed to health problems as a result of the mold in their housing units.

Was Assemblywoman Holly J. Mitchell (Dem. Los Angeles), corrupted by the influence of big money in her decision to collaborate with the CAA to weaken health and safety laws in California?

According to the records with Follow The Money, since she has been in office during the past year or two, Holly J. Mitchell (Dem. Los Angeles) in part has accepted $4,000 from the California Apartment Association, $4,000 from the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles, $30,500 from the California Association of Realtors, $4,374 from the California Building Industry Association, and an additional $1,500 from the California Hotel & Lodging Association.

Additionally, there is Senate Bill 600 (D-Pan) — Discrimination: Immigration Status.
According to the CAA: SB 600 amends the Unruh Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of “citizenship,” “immigration status,” and “primary language.”  “Under this bill, a landlord who asks a prospective tenant to verify his/her immigration status will not constitute a violation of this law. CAA requested, and the author added, language to the bill to clarify that landlords are not required to provide documents in a language other than English unless the landlord negotiates contracts in another language (as already required by existing law).”

This means that starting in 2016, U.S. citizens may have to prove their citizenship to rent a housing unit that may be uninhabitable (full of mold) from greedy landlords, and slumlords in California, because it will no longer be a violation of the law to demand that a prospective tenant must prove their citizenship, before renting to them.

Clotheslines – Energy Conservation — Assembly Bill 1448 (D-Lopez)
According to the CAA: “As initially introduced, AB 1448 would have prohibited residential lease provisions that restrict the use of clotheslines by tenants at the property. As amended, and signed by the Governor, the bill requires a tenant to obtain permission from the landlord prior to using a clothesline on the exterior of the building.”

Thanks to Assembly Bill 1448 (D-Lopez), starting in 2016, tenants who use a clothesline to dry their clothes outside at the property they reside at, may face eviction if they do not ask the landlord for permission first.

Liability and Litigation — Civil Actions: Objections to Pleadings — Senate Bill 383 (Wieckowski)
According to the CAA: “SB 383 imposes new court requirements before a demurrer can be filed. (A demurrer challenges the legal sufficiency of a cause of action in a complaint or of an affirmative defense in a court answer.) The bill requires the plaintiff and the defendants to meet and confer at least two separate times before any demurrer can be filed. The party filing the demurrer now must file a declaration about the efforts to meet and confer, and a court must make a determination if the meet‐and-confer process was sufficient.”

This means that starting in 2016, if tenants end up facing eviction for hanging their clothes on a clothes line without having the landlords permission beforehand, or if they face eviction for some other trumped up charge, their attorney can no longer file a demurrer against an unlawful detainer/5 Day Summons, unless the plaintiff and the defendants meet and confer at least two separate times first. Then a court must decide that this was sufficient, before a demurrer may be filed.

SB 383 makes it more complicated, expensive, and much harder for tenants to fight unlawful evictions by greedy landlords, slumlords and unscrupulous realtors involved in the eviction-for profit-system.

What kind of corrupting influence does big money bring to the California Legislature that makes the politicians want to weaken the rent laws and health and safety laws to such extremes, that tenants lives are being placed at risk?

According to the records of Follow The Money, it appears that the following associations and organizations below have been spending BIG MONEY to corrupt the legislature in California.

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES / IPPAC (ID# 782117)
$1,500

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES CURRENT ISSUES
$250

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES PAC
$1,500

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA CITIES / IPAAC
$1,500

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES (ID# 782117)
$800

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES / IP PAC
$1,000

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES / IPPAC
$11,600

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES / IPPAC (ID# 782117)
$400

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES IPPAC
$1,000

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES PAC
$400

CAA TRICOUNTY CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION
$1,100

CAAPAC CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION PAC
$500

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION
$6,568,432

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION
$110,000

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION (CAAPAC)
$4,100

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER INLAND EMPIRE
$500

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION PAC (CAAPAC IE)
$25,000

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION PAC CAAPAC CANDIDATE ACCOUNT
$4,100

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION PAC CAAPAC CANDIDATE ACCOUNT ID# 745208
$2,000

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION PAC IE ACCOUNT
$5,000

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION PAC(CAAPAC)
$1,500

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION POLITCAL ACTION COMMITTEE, CAAPC CANDIDATE ACCOUNT
$40,000

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITEE CAAPAC
$4,100

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE CAAPAC CANDIDATE ACCOUNT
$3,000

CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE, CAAPC CANDIDATE
$25,000

CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CITIES APARTMENT ASSOCIATION
$203,074

Lynda Carson may be reached at tenantsrule [at] yahoo.com

>>>>>>