Rent Control Fight in Council Chambers
Priforce Says New Ideas Should Be Looked At For Emeryville
Bauters Says NO
Citing constituent concerns about the lack of tenants' rights against rapacious landlords in Emeryville, Council member Kalimah Priforce Tuesday night attempted but failed to get his colleagues on the Council to agree to a future discussion about what the Councilman says are new laws some cities are bringing forward to help their citizens with rent stabilization. Ultimately, the Council majority let the issue of rent control/stabilization die for lack of a second Tuesday but they did vote to drive it over to a future Budget and Governance Committee meeting (4-1, Bauters dissenting). Historically, the Budget and Governance Committee has been a place the Council puts things they don’t want to deal with but nonetheless, Council member John Bauters told the Council rent control is not in the scope of the Committee and he said he preferred to let the whole rent control/stabilization topic just die.
 |
| Council Member John Bauters He says NO, the Council will not even discuss rent control or rent stabilization. It was looked into in 2017 and he won't hear any more about it. |
Over the last decade plus, Emeryville has been transformed from a city of owners into a city of renters, regardless that the City’s own General Plan says that is not permissible. Compounding the normal civic dysfunction deriving from landlords with too much power, is a new wrinkle in the landlord/tenant equation; namely, the large number of corporate Real Estate Investment Trusts that have become the new landlords in Emeryville. In the past, landlords in Emeryville were commonly somebody living nearby, many on property. Thus the established arguments in favor of home ownership as presented by the General Plan are further bolstered by the injection of nameless/faceless corporations, now with undue control over our communities.
Council member Bauters was adamant Tuesday night that nothing can be done to protect Emeryville renters, citing the 1995 California Costa-Hawkins Housing Act which is meant to place limits on municipal rent control ordinances. But Mr Priforce was equally conclusive that he was aware of and ready to report to the Council how some [California] cities have been establishing new and effective rent stabilization laws of late, despite Costa-Hawkins.
Council member Bauters’s election campaign recently received $5000 from the California YIMBY Victory Fund, a developer sponsored lobbying entity based in Sacramento, it should be noted. YIMBY works to overthrow municipalities autonomous planning departments in favor of a one-size-fits-all, laissez-faire, pro-developer polity. Some cities could be chastised for not building enough market rate housing but Emeryville is not one. Our city has built market rate apartments at a prodigious rate, shattering the numbers recommended by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), a regional planning agency and local government service provider that works to deliver a region wide housing jobs balance. Emeryville builds more market rate housing than any Bay Area city and does not need to add more, ABAG has shown. At this point, the increasing housing density in Emeryville is causing more problems than it is solving according to ABAG.
 |
| The Emeryville City Council in Their Element Kalimah Priforce asked, "What can we do to help keep renters in their homes?" (Priforce is standing on left, reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, Bauters, next to him, his hand moving to his head) |
Mr Bauters bristled at the idea that the City Council would discuss ways to help Emeryville renters stay in their homes, swatting down Mr Priforce’s ‘new laws’ presentation, “I’m not aware of what the new laws are” he said, adding, “In 2017 we did an exhaustive study about this. You’ve just asked for a bunch of things we’ve already done”. Council member Priforce offered a retort, “2017? A lot has happened since then.”
The video may be viewed by clicking the link below. The action begins at 38:26 and extends to 44:28:
So, they (YUMBY) claim to want to make housing affordable but then they don’t support it where rents keep going up & up?
ReplyDelete#YIMBYgentrifies
#YIMBYisfundedbydarkmoney
The YIMBY organization has been shown to support the building of more all rental apartment buildings only. They have not lobbied for more ownership housing. Only rental housing. That fact gives away their reason for being: If they were interested in bringing more housing to drive down prices (so they say), they would be lobbying for all housing, not just rentals. The fact is, developers can make more money building (and selling) rentals and so that's what YIMBY supports. They are a pro-corporate developer lobbying group, here to help maximize developer profits. Having said all this, I will add I think there is nothing wrong with a pro-developer lobbying group trying to help developers maximize profits.....but we should not be deceived...that IS why they're here.
DeleteIf we allow YIMBY developers to prevail, even if Bauters wins his new position, we might still deal with the aftermath of his supporters. So it’s time to take a stand for renters and make sure there is equitable numbers of affordable units. Council Priforce, (who technically should be a Mayor) received quite an applause. Stand behind him as our Sonny Liston. We’re in for the good fight because it’s right.
ReplyDelete"At this point, the increasing housing density in Emeryville is causing more problems than it is solving according to ABAG."
ReplyDeleteI don't believe this is true. More housing has a ton of benefit for our community and our region. I don't think ABAG would say this. What is your citation for this assertion?
ABAG helps local governments absorb growth and adapt to change while addressing sustainability, resilience and equity issues. Central to the resilience and equity mandates are the necessity for urban areas to maintain robust, ample and democratic common civic spaces like parks, squares and plazas. It’s all over their website, feel free to investigate. A 2018 ABAG White Paper entitled ‘Building Urban Resilience With Nature’ posits: “Nature is fundamental to the functioning of cities”. Indeed, much has been written in urban planning circles about the inequity of parks and open space when comparing wealthy urban enclaves against poor ones. ABAG is in total agreement with this.
DeleteEmeryville, having overbuilt (nameless faceless) apartment towers, has vastly exceeded every one of ABAG's recommended Regional Housing Needs Assessment implementation periods over the last 20 years, all at the expense of parks and open space. The result is we have built the worst city in the Bay Area for parks and open space (residents per acre of park land). This is in direct contradiction with ABAG’s recommendation for building urban resilience and sustainability. Emeryville has for decades used the density argument like a sledge hammer, oblivious to livability issues.
It’s not at all radical to assert there can be too much density, in fact, it’s actually how the science of urban planning began. Just ask ABAG or anyone else that sees the wholistic value in healthy communities.
Emeryville follows the desires of YIMBY who are here to assist real estate developers, working for Corporate REITs who want to maximize their profits. Livability, equity, resilience and sustainability don't enter into the equation.
If Priforce is aware of new laws that could help why doesn't he tell us what they are? I think he's just playing for the camera.
ReplyDeleteCouncil member Priforce didn't provide details because if he had, he would have violated California's Brown Act. The Council members are not allowed to speak on matters not on the agenda. That's what Mr Priforce was doing: trying to put this matter on a future agenda so the Council (and the public) can discuss it. Mr Priforce, by not telling us too much information, was playing to the law.
DeleteThere is nothing democrats misunderstand more than housing policy. Emeryville is the perfect case study for why YIMBY "build build build" give developers whatever they want, just get more housing! is a terrible approach. It's not a housing "policy" at all. It just leaves a city victim of out-of-state hedge funds and investment trusts that maximize profit by building a bunch of studios and one-bedroom apartment rentals and leave the podium retail at the bottom permanently vacant while they take tax write-offs on the vacancies. We even know how to do this right. The city bought a property itself and then put 100% affordable housing on it because we were able to insist on that even when developers cried "it won't pencil out." Yes, we need more affordable housing, but the answer is not to just build whatever maximizes developer profits. One has to have a mix of rental and ownership housing, one has to have schools and parks and other amenities that make those residents actually have a livable city. If there is any way to circumvent Costa-Hawkins, we should absolutely be exploring it. Emeryville has tried just giving giant subsidies and free reign to developers for decades and that alone doesn't actually provide affordable housing that people can stay in over the long term (and WANT to stay in). Reagan's "trickle-down" economics was a sham and so is "trickle-down" housing policy that assumes building over-priced studios for rent over and over again somehow achieves anything for Emeryville.
ReplyDeleteI am surprised by you Brian. You have always been very diligent and vigilant about holding Councilmembers accountable. When you provide comments at council meetings, you are always very prepared and specific about the issue you want to bring up, and are very specific about the action you want the council to take. Yet you consistently have a blind spot for Councilmember Priforce and overlook his consistent lack of preparedness and the way he ineffectively brings up ideas.
ReplyDeleteIt’s very noticeable in meetings and in forums that Mr Priforce makes great effort to pay attention to you. Don’t let that attention make you looking like a clueless tool who will support anything he does. You are too smart to let that happen. You are a citizen journalist, not his campaign manager.
The issue is not the lack of support over rent control by the rest of the council. The issue is Councilmember Priforce’s inability to effectively articulate and define a scope and provide tangible next steps that can direct action.
Here is a transcript of the public meeting.
“PRIFORCE: I would like us to talk about the discussion over rent control and further rent stabilization laws in Emeryville. The discussion around rent control has come up in terms of new ways of looking and approaching rent control for cities, to be able to take a look at what it is we can do to be able to keep people in their homes, renters in their homes in particular, is something that I would like for us to study.”
MAYOR: “Do we have majority support to place that as a future agenda item?”
[No one seconds it]
[MAYOR takes pity on Priforce and asks if he’s amenable for it to go to the budget committee.]
PRIFORCE: Yes.
[MAYOR asks if there is majority support for that. ]
MOURA: “what is the scope of discussion for the budget committee? Is it a very high level one or how specific are we talking?”
[Ding ding ding! This is what any staff member or committee will want to know to avoid getting on a wild goose chase]
PRIFORCE: “Uh, high level one. Uh I don’t understand what you mean by high level.”
MOURA: It’s a question of feasibility, is that right? Like is it legally permissible?
PRIFORCE: “Uh yes. To be able to look at what some cities are doing to establish more and better rent control and whether or not that’s something Emeryville can implement.”
I’m a resident watching this and my takeaway is that Mr Priforce is ill prepared. Even high schoolers can do a better job focusing the agenda request. WHAT are the specific aspects of rent control in Emeryville that are troubling to Priforce? WHAT about current rent control and rent stabilization laws in Emeryville does Priforce have issues with? Are there a proven source and numbers to back Priforce’s assertion that this is an issue in Emeryville? Has there been a specific upsurge in evictions in Emeryville? What is his data source? If he wants a study done, WHAT CITIES? WHY those cities? Any city in America?
Providing a scope for next steps doesn’t put Mr Priforce in violation of the Brown Act. Let’s call a spade a spade and a lack of preparedness a lack of preparedness.
You speak of fawning obsequiousness. It DOES happen all the time in the Council chambers….by the toadies Welch, Mourra and Kaur as they gaze coweringly towards John Bauters. Mayor Welch said it best: “I support John Bauters 100%”. Priforce is different, he’s a dissenter in this equation. Dear Leader Council member Bauters is a conservative, much more than the average Emeryville resident, and so a dissenter is absolutely critical (would be even without that political divide). You’ll note the Tattler too, is a dissenting voice these last 15 years. Somebody has to be there to represent a different vision when public servants stop serving the public and serve instead their commander colleague (who serves business interests). It was true during the reign of Queen Nora Davis and it’s true today.
DeleteI would say Council member Priforce does listen to me….me and you and every other citizen that appears there. I count his ability to listen to his constituents as a feature, not a flaw. I’m not blind, but I AM appreciative.
As to his ‘lack of preparedness’, I went back over the last few years and watched other Council members bring up future agenda items (I invite you to do the same). Noticeable is the lack of detail each Council member provides as they pitch their pet issue to their colleagues. That is by design. Because to start substantively to make their argument for why an issue should become an agenda item brings a clear violation of the Brown Act. The Council is not allowed to do that. The ‘scope’ you refer to would be a violation. All Mr Priforce needed to do with the rent control issue is note that other California cities have found new ways around Costa-Hawkins, which he did, and let the Council vote on making that an item they want to pursue in the future.
Every single issue brought up by a Council member could end up defeated by the Council majority in an open meeting discussion and some are. That would be your ‘wild goose chase’. But can you see the democracy in having new (and sometimes unpopular) topics discussed in an open meeting? The public could weigh in, the Council would be beholden to their vote and their demeanor would be open for public scrutiny. This is how it’s supposed to work. The Council should err on the side of democracy, not anything inaccessible to us capriciously lurking inside John Bauters’ brain. The people’s business is NOT supposed to be shut down by Dear Leader. Our Council business is OURS, not his.
Every nuance you elucidated in the bottom of your comment, the rent control stuff you say you want to hear about, you could hear in an open agendized meeting and you would be given your chance to have your say, as would I. Compared with shutting down the government to renters in our town, wouldn’t you say democracy is preferable? Or is it that you want to continue to see Council member Priforce silenced by Bauters?
Thank you Brian for your response, and as I don't respond to anonymous comments, I'll respond to yours.
DeleteYes, when I bring items as future agenda items, I make sure that (1) the city manager knows beforehand so I am prepared if there are any ongoing projects and activities the city is working on to address said issue, and (2) that I am in compliance with The Brown Act in that I don't violate the legal process of adding items to future agendas. To discuss the item or persuade others in placing items is a violation, and I will continue to follow the recommended course of adding items to future agendas.
I have to agree with the other anonymous commenter, CM Priforce is clearly unprepared. In this case, citing the Brown Act for not giving a reason for adding this item to the agenda is nonsensical. The Brown Act prohibits discussion on items not on the agenda, but you are allowed to say " I want to add a discussion on Rent Control to the Agenda due to X city or Y recent court case finding Z."
DeleteEveryone who works in the housing space knows that Costa-Hawkins severely limits the ability of cities to impose stricter rent control laws, something that was also discussed in the 2017 meeting CM Bauters cited. Without a specific reason, this is a discussion that's been had a million times already and would waste everyone's time. Much like a pledge of allegiance at every council meeting. Using the Brown Act to cover up being unprepared is frankly embarrassing.
The Brown Act states that substantive discussion of non-agendized items is not permitted. Citing reasons X, Y and Z would be entering into a substantive discussion. It would beg a response from a colleague and then a reply and off we go into non-democracy land. This is what Speaker of the State Assembly Ralph M Brown had in mind when he proposed his act. I understand you don’t like the Brown Act. Politicians a plenty agree with you that the act is unacceptable. The School Board at Emery really doesn’t like it and are constantly bumping up against it. But average citizen fans of democracy like the Brown Act because it protects them. I advise you to take it up any problems you have with it to your elected representatives in Sacramento.
Delete“Every nuance you elucidated in the bottom of your comment, the rent control stuff you say you want to hear about, you could hear in an open agendized meeting and you would be given your chance to have your say, as would I. Compared with shutting down the government to renters in our town, wouldn’t you say democracy is preferable? Or is it that you want to continue to see Council member Priforce silenced by Bauters?”
ReplyDeletePlease don’t misrepresent. It is a Councilmember’s responsibility to fight for his or her agenda item ask by providing relevant context and background, and a specific direction on what the ask is. This is what Councilmember Priforce should have done if he wanted to his colleagues to support the motion.
This is not Priforce’s first instance. It was the same for Watergate ADA, eviction data, Pledge of Allegiance, Gaza, among many other agenda asks.
I urge Priforce to do better. Learn to ask better questions, make more focused asks, provide better context. His strategy is to repeat repeat repeat. If no support from other members, his strategy is to wear others down by repeating the same ask, every single meeting. It’s something my toddler does. It’s not something leaders do.
It is also a misrepresentation to say others members don’t support him. I have watched many of last year’s meetings. Others help him but it often goes unnoticed since the juicy story is to say “another agenda ask gets denied”
Councilmember Moura consistently helps Priforce by following up on Priforce’s unfocused open-ended questions. As do Welch. Example of when EPD gave presentation on security camera pilot: Priforce said he was concerned there weren’t cameras near the apt he rents at.
Moura eventually helped him by upleveling the conversation. He noticed a lack of cameras over a noticeable stretch INCLUDING Priforce’s residence.
Welch also helped Priforce by asking a relevant question — are the presentation of the locations of the security cameras fixed? Or can new locations be added? What is the process for considering new adds?
As someone who voted for Priforce, even I recognize how poorly asked his question was. He came across as self serving for his apartment when other members are able to uplevel.
You state the other members are controlled by Bauters. This is inaccurate. I watched the Watergate ADA discussion, an issue and agenda ask pushed by Priforce.
In the final vote discussion, no one was supporting Priforce (again)’s option. He couldn’t articulate why in a way that made sense and looked informed. On the other hand, it was immediately apparent that Councilmember Kaur was extremely informed and knowledgeable, studied the info, asked informed questions and cited relevant details with each question. Priforce SUPPORTED Kaur’s option on Watergate ADA issue. Kaur WENT AGAINST Bauer since he dissented on Kauer’s option.
Please read my response again and you’ll note I did not misrepresent you. I asked you a question if you want continue to to see Council member Priforce silenced by Bauters. If the answer to that is ‘no’ or ‘yes’, then you can say that…or not. The choice is yours but asking a question cannot be characterized as a misrepresentation.
DeleteIf any Council member ever wants to deny Council member Priforce a chance to cast a future agenda item of his as having been shot down by an uncaring Council majority then all they need to do is to allow Council discussion of the item. See how easy that is? It serves two purposes; it disallows Mr Priforce a ‘victory’ in the court of public opinion and it allows the people of Emeryville to have the democracy they want. Or you can continue to pound your fist and kvetch to the roof tops about how unfair it all is.
PRIFORCE: “ Yes, when I bring items as future agenda items, I make sure that (1) the city manager knows beforehand so I am prepared if there are any ongoing projects and activities the city is working on to address said issue, and (2) that I am in compliance with The Brown Act in that I don't violate the legal process of adding items to future agendas. To discuss the item or persuade others in placing items is a violation, and I will continue to follow the recommended course of adding items to future agendas.”
ReplyDeletePRIFORCE in almost single past meeting for agenda item placement request:
• Meeting: Gaza. pledge of allegiance. 0 support from other members.
* next meeting: Gaza. pledge of allegiance. How to fight rent control. 0 support from other members.
* next meeting: Gaza. pledge of allegiance. How to fight rent control. 0 support from other members.
THE NARRATIVE: “I’m a dissenter!”
No one supports my agenda item requests.”
Or, EVERYONE else recognizes grandstanding and uninformed unfocused agenda asks.
There’s a saying for people who do the same thing expecting the same results.
They’re either crazy. Or toddlers.
The great thing about city council meetings is that they are recorded.
As someone who voted for Priforce and recognized his spectacular engagement, I was puzzled by Brian’s stories about the pushback Priforce was getting. How can such a popular and engaging candidate like Priforce get no support from the rest of the council?
I then went to watch last year’s meetings. Priforce has his heart in the right place but it’s just overwhelming apparent he doesn’t seem prepared.
if you watch closely, Kaur actually is in support with the issues Priforce is pushing for. She does not get the same pushback. The difference is Kaur is informed and prepared and can articulate their relevance more.
If I can vote again, I’d go for Kaur over Priforce. Dreams without execution or informed planning is just a dream.
You are asking why Council member Priforce cannot get a vote of support from his colleagues. Let’s look at the rent control issue. The Bauters’ led majority (all of them) supports YIMBY. That’s a lobbying group that looks after developers’ profit maximization. That’s all they do. Rent control is clearly antithetical to maximizing developers’ profits. I would never expect a politician that backs YIMBY to the extent this Council majority does, to legislate against YIMBY, that would be like biting the hand that literally feeds you.
DeleteJust to be clear, Council member Priforce has not stated that he’s a dissenter (although he often clearly is) and complained that his future agenda items commonly get rejected. That’s YOUR narrative about this. It could be Mr Priforce is an optimist and he continues to place items in the people’s interest before his colleagues for their consideration in the hope they will see how the people’s business is (supposed to be) their business.
Rent control is absolutely in the people of Emeryville’s wheelhouse, especially since the City Council majority has transformed us into a city of renters. It sounds like you disagree with that or you just don’t want this issue discussed for whatever reason (because you believe in trickle down housing perhaps?). That’s OK but many of us DO want to see rent control discussed by our elected officials. While we are dismayed our Council majority refuses, we are also appreciative that Council member Priforce is trying, on our behalf.
Brian, I am glad you say you are appreciative and not blind. And that you recognize Priforce’s willingness is a “feature.” I was worried you’ve become a toadie too but it seems the other way around. Seems you’re very aware, and that you are strategically using this “feature” as a way to gain further voice into council meetings. Good for you. No wonder the council is resistant to Priforce’s ideas.
ReplyDeleteThe Council majority is resistant to Mr Priforce’s ideas for ideological reasons sometimes and sometimes for childish reasons- to not allow him a ‘victory’. RE: ideology; Council member Priforce is a progressive. That’s not just me saying that. The Paul Wellstone Democratic Club says that…and so do many other progressive organizations in the Bay Area and beyond. Mr Bauters, who runs our city, calls himself a progressive because so many of our residents are progressives. But on matters that matter to the people, he (quietly) legislates as a conservative. Again, that’s not me saying it, that’s his record.
DeleteAs for me; the Tattler is progressive. Look to the masthead for evidence of that: 'The Emeryville Commons From the Resident’s Perspective'. As in; people, not businesses.