presents
Voter’s Edge California
Get the facts before you vote.
Brought to you by
MapLight
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
KPBS Voters Guide@KPBSNews
November 6, 2018 — California General Election
Local

City of National City
Measure W - Majority Approval Required

To learn more about measures, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.

Election Results

Failed

5,960 votes yes (49.4%)

6,115 votes no (50.6%)

100% of precincts reporting (25/25).

12,756 ballots counted.

Rent Control
— undefined

Shall an ordinance be adopted establishing a Program of Residential Rent Control, including just cause for eviction and rent stabilization provisions, and creating a five-member Rent Board to administer and enforce the program?

What is this proposal?

Measure Details — Official information about this measure

Impartial analysis / Proposal

City Attorney, National City

CITY ATTORNEY’S IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS

Currently, there is no form of rent control under the laws of the City of National City. If approved by a majority vote, this measure would approve an ordinance establishing a program of residential rent control. The ordinance would apply to all residential rental units, defined in the ordinance as “Controlled Rental Units,” with the following exceptions: rental units in hotels or motels; rental units in hospitals, extended care medical facilities, non-profit homes for the aged, or dormitories; rental units owned by certain types of non-profit; rental units which applicable state or federal law exempt from rent control; where a single-family home is the primary residence of the homeowner and (i) the rental unit is one of two units on the same parcel, and one of the units is occupied by a person as a primary residence, or (ii) the tenant shares a bathroom or kitchen with the homeowner, or (iii) the homeowner creates a temporary tenancy of no more than 12 consecutive months.

The ordinance would create a Rent Board, composed of five members serving staggered four-year terms, appointed by the City Council. The Board would finance its reasonable and necessary expenses by charging landlords annual “Rental Housing Fees.” The Board would administer and enforce the rent control program independently of the City Council, City Manager, and City Attorney, including adopting and implementing its own budget, hiring its own administrative and legal staff, and retaining outside attorneys and consultants, without approval of the City Council. A legal question exists as to the validity of the provisions granting the Rent Board the independent authority to adopt its own budget, and to hire its own staff and retain outside attorneys and consultants.

The ordinance would include “just cause for eviction protections”, which would prohibit a landlord from taking action to terminate any tenancy except under specified circumstances, such as the tenant’s failure to pay rent or substantial violation of material terms of the rental agreement.

The ordinance would include rent stabilization provisions, under which a “Base Rental Rate” would be established for each Controlled Rental Unit. The Base Rental rate would serve as the reference point from which the “Maximum Allowable Rate” for any controlled rental unit shall be adjusted upward or downward each year. No later than June 30 of each year, the Rent Board would announce the percentage by which rent for Controlled Rental Units will be adjusted effective September 1 of that year, referred to as the “Annual General Adjustment.” The Annual General Adjustment would be equal to 100% of the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index, or any successor designation of that index. Upon the receipt of a petition by a landlord and/or a tenant, the Maximum Allowable Rent may be adjusted upward or downward by a hearing officer appointed by the Board, whose decision may be appealed to the Board.

The proposed measure was placed on the ballot by a petition signed by the requisite number of voters.

Published Arguments — Arguments for and against the ballot measure

Arguments FOR

No argument in favor of this measure was submitted.

— San Diego County Registrar of Voters

Arguments AGAINST

ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION TO RESIDENTAIL [sic] RENT CONTROL
MEASURE W

Don’t be fooled! Measure W does nothing to solve our housing crisis and will only make it worse!

The flawed Measure W will reduce the number of available rental units in National City and result in the deterioration of the homes that remain. We need to maintain and improve the quality of life in National City, not destroy it.

Cities like San Francisco, Berkeley, and Los Angeles have rent control and currently have some of the highest rents in the nation.

Independent housing experts agree that policies like Measure W drive up the cost of housing, reduce the amount of affordable housing available, and encourage landlords to sell or convert their apartments.

Measure W creates a new government bureaucracy at City Hall, appointed by politicians with blank check authority to set its own salary, assess fees, hire countless staff, consultants, and lawyers, issue subpoenas, and sue without oversight.

In fact, Measure W reduces housing availability for lower-income residents by allowing any available housing covered by Measure W to go to residents with higher credit scores and income levels, instead of prioritizing those units for seniors, veterans, teachers, working families and other residents who actually need affordable housing.

Measure W makes it very difficult to evict problem tenants. Those who put the safety of their neighbors at-risk by dealing drugs or engaging in other dangerous activities will be safeguarded from evictions, degrading neighborhood quality of life.

Measure W’s extensive rules, costs, and bureaucracy will reduce housing stock as owners remove rental units. Without continued reinvestment in housing, neighborhoods decline and the tax base for schools erodes.

Join neighbors, civic leaders, school officials, and local business owners in voting No on Measure W.

www.ProtectOurHousing.com

Jackie Venegas
Teacher

Brian Clapper

Ron Morrison
Mayor of National City

Ditas Delossantos Yamane
Planning Commissioner, Chair

— San Diego County Registrar of Voters

Read the proposed legislation

Proposed legislation

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Due to numerous problems with the numbering of subsections of this measure, its full text has not been entered into Voter's Edge by a League of Women Voters volunteer. Voter's Edge will instead point to the full text in a PDF version of a sample ballot prepared by the San Diego County Registrar of Voters: https://www2.sdcounty.ca.gov/rov/Sample_Ballots/Eng/SB-ENG-569.pdf

To find your own sample ballot version, containing all the candidates and measures on your own ballot, please use the ROV's sample ballot look-up tool at https://www2.sdcounty.ca.gov/rov/Eng/ballot.asp .

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 

Who supports or opposes this measure?

Yes on Measure W

Organizations (2)

Elected & Appointed Officials (0)
No on Measure W

Organizations (2)

Elected & Appointed Officials (0)

More information

Use tabs to select your choice. Use return to create a choice. You can access your choices by navigating to 'My Choices'.

Please share this site to help others research their voting choices.

PUBLISHING:PRODUCTION SERVER:PRODUCTION