Subject: For Council Meeting 4-29-25
From: Oxnard Central <
To: [email protected]
Date Sent: Monday, April 28, 2025 11:05:12 AM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Monday, April 28, 2025 11:05:28 AM GMT-07:00 Dear City Clerk:
May I ask you to provide this as a public comment for the April 29th meeting? The agenda list is not available online so I am unable to specify which item but it is regarding the consideration of instilling rigid anti- harassment laws against property owners.
Who Deserves The Protection?
Please ask yourself who you are protecting when you develop strict so-called “anti-harassment” laws.
In a multi-family living situation, there is always one family that pushes the boundaries causing distress and discomfort for the other well- behaving tenants.
Are you protecting the elderly tenant who suffers from heart disease and is affected by tenant who insists on playing loud and obnoxious music late at night? Or, the child who has asthma and is affected by the smoker who smokes outside their bedroom in the nonsmoking building?
Or, the lonely person that has an ESA dog that is intimidated by the neighbor with an aggressive dog? Or, the person who works from home that is constantly interrupted by the neighbor who plays video games full blast all day?
Or, the person who regularly has their car blocked by a neighbor and is unable to go to work.
These are real-life situations. If this new law passes, landlords will be too fearful to maintain control of their rental homes.
We are a small “mom-and-pop” with a property in Oxnard; our tenants are long-term and enjoy residency there because we maintain a tight ship. Smokers are reminded to stay off property; gamers are asked to wear headphones; cars face towing if parked inappropriately.
If this law passes, we will no longer have the confidence to maintain order.
Please consider who you are protecting: the behaving tenants or the misbehaving tenants? Most property owners prefer not to micro-manage their tenants. Tenants that follow the rules are ideal, but to keep the culture enjoyable for these tenants, property owners need to have confidence that they can have conversations with tenants without fear of reprisal.
Protect the well-behaving citizens of Oxnard and vote against these extreme laws as the well- behaving citizens of Oxnard are the ones who will suffer the most. 1 / 6
Subject: FW: Agenda Item M2 - Anti-Harassment - Tuesday, 4/29 City Council Meeting From: Janet Gagnon <
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date Sent: Monday, April 28, 2025 6:29:59 PM GMT-07:00
Date Received: Monday, April 28, 2025 6:30:06 PM GMT-07:00 Attachments: AAGLA Letter Oxnard Anti-Harassment-04282025-Clean.pdf From: Janet Gagnon
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2025 1:22 PM
To:
'[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Cc: Daniel Yukelson < Jesus Rojas-Olmos <
Subject: Agenda Item M2 - Anti-Harassment - Tuesday, 4/29 City Council Meeting
Dear Mayor McArthur and Members of the Oxnard City Council:
Attached please find a formal comment letter from the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (“AAGLA”) regarding agenda item M2, a proposed draft anti-harassment ordinance. AAGLA has been in business since 1917 and is the largest local association specifically representing rental housing providers throughout Ventura, San Bernardino and Los Angeles counties, including many in Oxnard. More than 80% of our members are mom-and-pop multifamily owners and, as such, we provide a unique perspective on rental housing issues.
Thank you for your consideration of our concerns and recommendations.
Best regards,
Janet M. Gagnon
Janet M. Gagnon, Esq.
Senior Vice President, Government Affairs & External Relations Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles
621 South Westmoreland Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90005
t: ext 309 | f: 888/384-4131 |
www.aagla.org
Twitter |Facebook | LinkedIn
The Voice of Multifamily Housing Since 1917 ©
“Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.”
John Stuart Mill - 1867
2 / 6
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES
AAGLA
“Great Apartments Start Here!”
information and assistance in linking parties with available resources and education on the existing Just Cause ordinance, among other things.
The proposed anti-harassment ordinance would include the creation of a new enforcement body within the City Attorney’s office estimated to cost HALF A MILLION DOLLARS. Yet there is no data provided by City staff as to the actual number of specific harassment complaints the City has received over the last 5 years or number of phone calls to properly measure the claimed “increase” in harassment. To spend such significant financial resources, the City should first request and study actual data from the City’s rent stabilization program to justify this proposed substantial new cost entailing two new full-time positions with full benefits and pensions with salaries ranging from $60,000 to $112,000 and $156,000 to $216,000. This is especially needed when the City has not yet made any attempt at less expensive, and equally or more effective solutions such as mediation.
Instead, the City staff merely reference Santa Monica’s existing anti-harassment program. The data provided states that 200 claims have been received with only 5 to 10 total claims leading to litigation.
This is only 2.5% to 5% of all claims. Based on these extremely limited numbers, there appears to be a substantial number of claims that do not rise to the level requiring litigation and/or false or inaccurate claims being made. It would be far more cost effective for Oxnard to utilize the same funding to run a mediation program that could have greater impact citywide on far more renters. The City might even consider creating a small rental assistance program for those renters that would merely prefer to move out of their existing residences.
In addition, the anti-harassment ordinance would create a huge barrier between mom-and-pop owners and renters, since housing providers would no longer feel comfortable having conversations with renters for fear of being wrongly accused of harassment at some later date. This would prevent owners from being able to resolve day-to-day issues in a direct, amicable and quick manner. Also, it would take away a renter’s ability to communicate directly with the owner to resolve infractions such as delayed payment of rent, nuisance, and parking issues in an amicable manner. Instead of pushing renters and rental housing providers into the highly adversarial process of dealing with a City Attorney, the City should look to mediation as a better, more productive and positive manner of dealing with such issues.
Further, the proposed anti-harassment ordinance has penalties that are so extreme that a single misstep would force a mom-and-pop owner into bankruptcy. This would harm both the small business owners that rely on their multifamily properties as their main source of income during retirement as well as all their renters that would lose their housing when the property is sold to satisfy a single judgement. If this ordinance is to move forward, then it must be revised to recognize the substantially different financial resources of small rental housing providers versus large corporations, institutional investors or developers. There should also be a tiered structure for penalties to differentiate between a first-time offender and an owner with repeated violations for the same offense. To destroy a mom-and-pop small business owner due to a single misstep will only make Oxnard’s housing crisis worse.
Lastly, the anti-harassment ordinance only attempts to provide protection for only one type of resident rather than all residents suffering from wrongful harassment. Mom-and-pop rental housing providers are increasingly experiencing harassment from much younger, physically stronger renters that are angry about paying any rent whatsoever as they believe the government should be providing free housing. As such, 4 / 6
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES
AAGLA
“Great Apartments Start Here!”
many long-time rental housing providers are leaving the industry fearing for their personal safety. If this ordinance is to move forward, it should be written so that harassment is illegal in ALL cases regardless of who is the perpetrator and who is the victim.
We urge the City Council to take a long-term view on housing and pass legislation with programs that helps renters and rental housing providers to have a healthy and harmonious relationship rather than promoting increased hostility and causing a cold war as this anti-harassment ordinance would do. We urge the City to obtain more facts from the City staff as to how many verified harassing complaints that are not already covered by criminal offenses are being reported and whether they can be better resolved by mediation and/or a rental assistance program.
Thank you for your time and consideration of these matters. Please feel free to reach out to me directly by telephone at Ext. 309 or via electronic mail at
Sincerely,
Janet M. Gagnon
Janet M. Gagnon, Esq.
CC: Daniel Yukelson, Executive Director, Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles
5 / 6
Subject: Reports M1 Resolution Opposing the Lease Extension of OBGS From: 'Joan Tharp' via City Clerk <[email protected]> To: [email protected]
Date Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 11:29:17 AM GMT-07:00 Date Received: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 11:29:33 AM GMT-07:00 Honorable Mayor and council members,
My name is Joan Tharp and I'm a 30-year resident of Port Hueneme and a volunteer with the Surfrider Foundation Ventura County and Ventura Audubon Society's Shorebird Recovery Program.
I'm writing this to encourage the council to support the resolution opposing a third extension to continue the operation of Ormond BeachPower Station Beyond December 31, 2026.
The Surfrider Foundation's mission is to protect the world's oceans, waves, and beaches, for the enjoyment of all people. Surfrider opposes once-through cooling systems like OBGS as they are known to harm marine ecosystems by exposing them to thermal & physical stress.
The Shorebird Recovery program aims to safeguard the federally listed Western Snowy Plover and California Least Tern-both species nest on Ormond Beach.
I have worked, played and volunteered on Ormond Beach for over 30 years, and have witnessed the past industrial degradation of Ormond beach and wetlands, the present barrier to access and the pollution from the generating station, as well as the current efforts from the community, non-profits, and government entities to restore this important wetlands area.
Oxnard residents deserve safe access to a healthy Ormond Beach. Community members in Oxnard have been fighting for years for clean air & coastal access, and opposing the lease extension would honor the council's commitment to the residents you serve.
Show your support for the people of Oxnard and Port Hueneme and the flora and fauna of this critical wetlands environment and accept the resolution opposing a third extension to continue the operation of Ormond BeachPower Station Beyond December 31, 2026.
With best regards,
Joan Tharp (she/her)
Lead Ormond Beach Campaign
V olunteer | HOTYB Program-Plastic-Free Ventura County | 805 469 3865 https://ventura.surfrider.org/
Do you have a Surfrider membership? Grab yours here and support Ventura County's 43 miles of coastline! Inline image
6 / 6