Rome, Carthage, City Council And Income Property
By Walter Moore, Candidate for Mayor of Los Angeles, MooreIsBetter.comHistorians used to believe that when the ancient Romans finally conquered Carthage, they not only razed all the Carthagians’ buildings, but plowed salt into their soil to prevent them from growing crops.
Yesterday, L.A.’s City Council unanimously did essentially the same thing to constituents who own income property built before 1979. The City Council passed an ordinance -- which I would veto but Villaraigosa will not -- that applies rent control not just to buildings built before 1979, but to any new buildings erected on the same soil!
So even if you tear down your old building, and put up a brand new one, you’re still going to be stuck with rent control. It is the legal equivalent of putting salt in your soil so you can never receive all the fruits of your efforts.
The City Council thus eliminated, in the blink of an eye, even more of the property rights of people who own the land under the 620,000 rent-controlled units in this city.
If you want a Mayor who will protect your civil rights as the owner of a home, business or income property, then join the people who have contributed over $11,000 to my campaign today at MooreIsBetter.com. (We're less than $139,000 away from qualifying for matching funds and getting a guaranteed spot in the televised debates!)
Posted by Walter Moore @ 5/23/2007 07:20:00 AM
19 Comments:
Walter...
So a developer who has a rent-controlled building should be able to kick everyone out, demolish that building, and within 5 years have a new apartment complex? Come on now...Thats just plain dumb.
ah Yes!!! OUr hero's the jarvis tax payer group....
Don't change prop 13 and it will continue to get worse. Like I have said ;don't take away the protections in the unfair increases in arbitrarily reassessing the property and arbitrarily increasing the property taxes , but sending the bulk of the taxes to the state makes the local poles unbeholden to property owners in any tangible way.
Sales Tax revenue is the most important source of revenue for the general fund....
gentrification will continue to go unabated , rent control will continue to remain in the books , and densification will continue to increase. HAve you noticed that all of the infill housing is being built from the ground up? These property owners are building on property ,for the most part, that was never housing in the first place.
Gotta love the trojan horse in proposition 13
8:05
Yes, he should, provided he is not contractually obligated to the tenants to refrain from doing so (e.g., if they negotiated 10-year lease terms).
That's not dumb, it's property rights -- you know, like all the other civil rights we have?
Godzilla
Have you even looked at the revenues the City receives from property taxes, and how they have skyrocketed since 2000? Ditto re total tax revenues? The City has more than enough revenues to do everything it needs to do.
The problem is not under-taxation, it is irresponsible spending by career politicians who reward their contributors by giving them our tax dollars.
Geez, Wacko, even if vetoing this is a good idea, there's less than a 0 percent chance you'll ever have the opportunity to "veto" anything put forward by any legislative body, anywhere.
The closest you'll ever get to being considered a potential winner in L.A.'s mayoral race is if the roof caves in at the first candidates' debate and everyone is killed (and you weren't invited -- which is more than likely,and the only believable aspect of that disastrous fairy tale scenario).
OH, and the filing deadline would have to already be past.
Even then, "none of the above" would probably win in a landslide.
Save your personal wealth and buy that condo in Wyoming that's got your name written all over it -- or time travel back to 1954. Either one suits you better than big city politics.
805 - Yes
Garza - take your meds
Walter - its just like my wife, over spending
902 - stranger things have happened. In 1978 no one would have ever given Ronald Reagan a chance to win the presidency
1001
"Stranger things" is one matter, absurdities like that don't even happen in La La land, outside of Wacko's dreams anyway.
R. Reagan gave incumbent deadhead G. Ford a run for his money in GOP primaries in 1976, and walked into the party convention that year with 47 percent of the delegates. Anyone who dismissed him out of hand in 1978, especially considering the train-wreck Carter's term was becoming, would have been a political speed bump (or Pauline Kael). He also came into the play as a two-term governor of the country's largest state.
Wacko is no Ronnie Raygun, nope, nope, nope . . . don't even bet the flower box, let alone the farm.
Lets just say this:
RR was a washed up actor in 1965 making his living from the chicken dinner circuit. He was no longer making movies and his TV show was cancelled. No one would have ever thought he would have been Governor let alone President. He is no Arnold either - Arnold was a much bigger movie star than Ronnie could have dreamed of.
So if you are thinking that Wally's chickens are still born, don't be too surprised when he's clucking your way.
Garza listen up.
Before Prop 13 lots of seniors and disabled people were losing their homes because the County and the State kept jacking up their home property taxes. That was back when a poor person could actually own a home.
God bless Howard Jarvis.
They're not making it retroactive, are they? That wouldn't be fair.
I'm totally against rent control. If the City wants affordable housing, they should pay for it. Don't make small landlords pay poor people's rent. Spread the cost of supporting the poor on everyone, not just hard working people who saved every cent they ever made to buy a building.
Rent control causes areas to decay. What landlord will want to maintain his building properly when he's losing money on it. A lot of elderly landlords who never raised the rents on their tenants were totally ripped off when rent control rolled into Santa Monica. They ended up losing their buildings due to high expenses which the rents would not cover.
Rent Control, just another feel good program with serious detrimental down side. Property rights are under real attack. Be wary of sustainable development, smart growth groups, its more about control than freedom of choice in property rights.
Up the HJTG, Thank God for P-13.
1112
No chickens, stillborn or otherwise and definitely no place in the pecking order, just one DUMB (and wacko) cluck that's full of himself, armed with a bag full of simple-ass "fixes" for problems he reads about the next day in the LA Times, monday morning quarterbacking in his own delusional one-team, one-player, fantasy football league.
Plus, any few fans left will run off in all directions when all of Wacko's fascist and racist rants here are replayed for the folks who don't live in the mayor's mansions they build in their own minds ("I could tell they were illegal aliens from my second-story office window as their bus pulled in at the polling place," sez Walter).
1:12 and 1:39
You are SO on my staff if I get elected. You "get it:" property rights, economics, experience and fairness all weigh AGAINST rent control.
3:15
Your misquotation demonstrates the wisdom of the hearsay rule. I would ask you to back your statement up with an actual quotation, but we both know you can't.
But be sure to put that line in the Mayor's briefing notebook for the debates.
Cut and past below:
California has become home to some of the most peculiar revenue-raising mechanisms in the history of American public finance. Parcel taxes, previously not permitted, are now common. Mello-Roos taxes were invented specifically to circumvent Proposition 13, and in the process created a municipal bonding mechanism that many on Wall Street still don't understand. Development impact fees are now a basic part of the California landscape -- as is the "nexus consultant," whose job it is to prove the relationship between the fee being charged and the problem being created by the project. The state has also seen creative use of many different types of assessment districts. The end result has been to shift most of the cost of new infrastructure from property taxpayers to developers and new homebuyers.
And the point is?:
developers will continue to get vip treatment from local government because .......they put money directly into the City Coffers, while the cities wait every fiscal year to see how much money the state will return in the form of backfill.
So instead of waiting like beggar for the state , increase the amount of building, destroy single family dwelling unit neighborhoods in the process , all because that 1% of sales tax the city gets to keep and is certain , is quite a bit of money.
Keep prop 13 , keep the best part of it , but as long as the state continues to disperse the property taxes , the city in no way sees the homeowners as important as the senators and assembly people they need to have as friends in Sacramento in order to make sure the city gets back as much of that property tax and sales tax etc , to provide the infrastructure for those property owners , who don't understand , thatthe unintended consequence of prop 13 was signing away their influence in local city government.
NOw prop 13 ins't bad , but we need to change the way the money is allocated and dispersed so that the local homeowner can get their rightful place and voice back into government or the poor who pay most of the sales tax , will be the people local pols cater too.And of course the developer who has to pay all kinds of fees that local city coffers also want.
You can bury your head in the sand and be as arrogant as you want, but the homeowner has no voice in local government.
I am not saying the homewner isn't paying lot's of property tax , but it is how it gets into the hands of the local pol that determine how those pols treat the property owners. This, of course , being a unintended consequence of shifting the disbursement burden to the state.
Back in 93 when the state shifted a lot of that money to the schools , it showed local municipalities that they needed to find other ways of putting money into the general fund.
AS a result , we are seeing the destruction of the single family dwelling unit neighborhood...if I was a homeowner , and I saw the writing on the wall , I would be selling right now.
This was passed because of the illegal aliens in Los Angeles. These liberal clowncil members are all supporting illegals because they think when they run for another office the will have the Latino vote. NOT!!! there's a hell of a lot of Latinos who are against the illegals and want ICE to start their raids right in the heart of downtown LA.
4:30 pm
like I said,
that sales tax revenue is more important to city revenue than the property tax.
Thus , why ruing a good thing?
They work and they spend money -cha ching... sales tax.
Just what we need, Walter, another mayor who is the champion of commercial property owners' rights. Same as it ever was!
Property rights are civil rights. Yes, I will defend them.
What I will NOT defend is the practice of Villaraigosa and the City Council, whereby they give your hard-earned tax dollars to developers who have contributed to their campaigns.
Do you see the difference? Standing up for property rights is one thing. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is another.
You know, common sense could kick in (I know, we are talking LA here) and Walter could have his day. I can't figure out where in the constitution the government is given the right to control what a building owner charges for rent.
When my landlord raised the rent too much we moved, a lot of us did... he had a half empty building after ward. I didn't like it, but it was his building and his decision.
I wouldn't like having to maintain a building based on the City of LA's assessment on what I can charge for rent.
Why don't they determine what stores can charge for avocados, apples... what the theaters should charge for popcorn, what doctors can charge for examinations or treatment? Why don't they determine a price essentials like electricity, gasoline...
Scary when you thing how LA is run... no police, city services, street repair, the schools are a mess...
my understanding is that rent control has resulted in fewer rental properties available... they're going condo and no surprise.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home