McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Pasadena Housing Providers
Friday, February 28, 2025 4:53 PM
City_Council
PublicComment-AutoResponse
City Council agenda item 8 - eviction defense for wildfire victims Some people who received this message don't often get email from i important
,'arn why this is
[,l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear members of the City Council
In agenda item 8, you will be voting on a proposal made to you by the Pasadena Rental Housing Board.
The agenda item includes a memorandum dated February 27th states that there was a unanimous decision at the PRHB meeting on February 6th. However, the modified proposal being presented to you did NOT meet with unanimous agreement at the PRHB meeting of February 27th.
The modified proposal before you has an extended moratorium period of twelve months instead of the six months that had been unanimously agreed. This is much longer than the equivalent regulation agreed by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, and unlike the LA County regulation it contains NO proposal for funding the costs that will fall on landlords if tenants do not pay rent.
We urge you to approve an affirmative defense to keep fire victims housed, but with the following safeguards:
1) To set an initial period of six months as unanimously approved by the Rent Board on February 6th, which can then be extended if necessary;
2) To charge City staff with developing mechanisms to help landlords with the costs of managing without rental payments for an extended period of time; 3) To require more than "self-certification" of financial hardship by affected tenants, as thjs type_of attestation was severely abused during the Covid eviction moratorium.
ItemS
1 These changes will allow housing providers to continue to invest in Pasadena, rather than encouraging them to get out of the business altogether.
Respectfully
Pasadena Housing Providers
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Victor Caballero
Friday, February 28, 2025 5:09 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Mayor and City Council, Urged Not Pass Eviction Moratorium as Presented Some people who received this message don't often get email from.earn why this is important [ l ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear Mayor and City Council,
The proposed tenant eviction moratorium is short sighted and misguided.
There is no protection for property owners who no longer have funds from tenants not paying rent..
If PHRB wants to propose these "protections" to the council ,then they should be looking at the whole picture of who is being impacted because it's certainly not just tenants.
On top of that, enablingtenantstoself verify is absurd and will certainly encourage unfounded claims.
Stop the one sided agenda of PHRB that hurts small family property owners. PHRBisdoinga great job at dismantling family property owners.
PHRB does NOT have a fair and equitable representation of property owners/Landlords and the agenda pursued by those who have been put in charge continues to be punitive and costly to housing providers in Pasadena.
As of yet, PHRBhas not accounted for the nearly half a million dollars in a no bid contract that was paid to bhyv consultants with one of the principals Agnes Cho working with Ryan Bell..
Mr. Bell serves as the Chair of the PHRB, a clear conflict of interest that should carry immediate dismissal for unethical practices. Have ati board members taken required AB 1234 Ethics Training? Regards,
Victor Caballero.
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 Pasadena Foothills Association of REALTORS®
1070 E Green Street Pasadena, CA 91106
2/28/2025
Mayor and City Coimcil
City of Pasadena
lOON.GarfieldAve.
Pasadena, CA 91101
RECEIVED
2925 FEB 31 AM 8:47
CITY CLERK
CITY OF PASADENA
Subject: Opposition to Proposed Emergency Eviction Defense Policy Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
On behalf of the Pasadena Foothills Association of REALTORS® (PFAR) and our members, we write to express concerns regarding the Pasadena Rental Housing Board's recommendation to implement a one-year emergency eviction defense policy for tenants impacted by the Eaton Fire.
While we support efforts to assist those experiencing financial hardship due to the fire, we urge the Council to reconsider this proposal for the following reasons:
1. Lack of Clear Definition of "Hardship" - The term "financial hardship" is overly vague and lacks clear parameters. Without specific criteria, the policy could be applied inconsistently, creating uncertainty for both tenants and housing providers. Establishing a defined standard is essential for fair and effective implementation.
2. Inconsistency with County Policy - Los Angeles County has established a six-month eviction defense policy for disaster-related financial hardship. Introducing a separate one-year standard in Pasadena would create unnecessary confusion for tenants and housing providers, especially those operating in multiple jurisdictions. Aligning with county policy would enhance consistency and ease of compliance.
3. Need for Verifiable Documentation - The proposal currently allows tenants to self-certify their hardship under penalty of perjury, which does not provide sufficient safeguards against potential misuse. Ifaone-year provision is adopted, it should require verifiable documentation, such as proof of lost income or increased expenses directly related to the Baton Fire. Ensuring proper documentation will protect both tenants in need and property owners from undue financial burden.
The Pasadena Foothills Association of REALTORS® appreciates the City Council's commitment to assisting residents impacted by the Baton Fire. However, we urge you to carefully consider these concerns and adopt a balanced approach that provides necessary relief while maintaining fairness and clarity in housing policy.
Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to ongoing discussions on this matter.
Sincerely,
Sam Sger
Government Affairs Director
Pasadena Foothills Association of REALTORS®
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Chuck Stanislawski •
Saturday, March 1, 2025 5:10 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Monday Night's Pasadena City Council Agenda Item 8 - OPPOSED Some people who received this message don't often get email from imoortant
n. Learn whvJhis js
[ ;t ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear City Council,
After renting housed in Pasadena for over 40 years, this letter is to infonn you that I am strongly against the Pasadena Rental Housing Board recommending that the City impose a 1-year EMERGENCY ORDINANCE FOR EMERGENCY EVICTION DEFENSE FOR TENANTS IMPACTED BY THE BATON FIRE. A City eviction moratorium (a/k/a, eviction defense) is unnecessary as the LA. County Board of Supervisors just passed a countywide eviction moratorium/defense on Tuesday, February 25th that is now in effect and a City specific moratorium will only cause confusion, and we DON'T need any additional confusion relating to my rental properties.
The County's new countywide eviction moratorium/defense resolution covers renters in ALL 88 incorporated cities, including Pasadena, as well as the unincorporated areas. A new city specific eviction moratorium will only cause huge amounts of confusion among renters and rental housing providers leading to improper implementation and compliance issues. Your duplication of regulations already in existence is an example of incompetence and a waste of the city government's time which of course wastes more of our taxpayer's money, and we have seen too many examples recently of excessive waste, fraud and abuse by the government.
Best Regards,
Charles G. Stanislawski, M.B.T., C.P.A., C.T.C.
Certified Specialist in Estate Planning by the Institute for Preparing Heirs (
ft
STANISLA WSKI & COMPANY, INC.
A Certified Public Accounting & Business Consulting Finn 729 Mission Street, Suite 100
South Pasadena, CA 91030
P: 626.441.0330 xl02 • F: 626.441.3933
www. stanislawskiandcompany. com
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 P.S. I imagine a few times each year you are asked to recommend an experienced and reputable C.P.A. firm. I hope our past discussions reflect the experience and enthusiasm which make Stanislawski & Company, Inc. stand out on top of your list of references. Business is great at Stanislawski & Company, Inc. and we are looking for more.
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL This communication and any accompanying documents are confidential and privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you receive this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon this communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client, accountant-client, or other privileges as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please contact me at the above email address. Thank you. 2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
DuaneAlleman
Sunday, March 2, 2025 6:39 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Eviction moratorium for fire victims
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] arn why this is
[ -L ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
As both a landlord and resident of Pasadena I am opposed to a City of Pasadena eviction moratorium for victims of the fire.
The County of LA passed an eviction moratorium last Thursday which includes Pasadena, so for the City of Pasadena to pass a separate similar resolution would cause confusion for both renters and landlords.
Thank you for your consideration.
DuaneAlleman
Pasadena, CA
Sent from my iPhone
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
AB
Sunday, March 2, 2025 5:28 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Re City Council Agenda item 8 for 3-3-25.
Some people who received this message don't often get email from.earn why this i s importa nt [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnow the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Has the Rent Control Board quantified the number of tenants who are housed, but lost their income due to the fire?
Is it five? A dozen? Zero? Do they even know? Yet they ask you to impose an eviction moratorium on thousands of apartments across the whole city.
Even though the county already did this. Why create a redundant measure? Permission to not pay rent would only saddle renters with huge debts they could never repay.
That is bad government.
Good government would beta help that small number of tenants to find new jobs. Perhaps even to provide income subsidies for those few people. But not a blanket restriction on tens of thousands.
This moratorium request is an extreme, irresponsible idea, proposed by fringe elements in the city.
Please exercise your good and reasonable judgement to reject it.
Let the Rent Control Board find those few people who lost their job, and help them find work. But then, we already have an employment office. So why not ask the rent control board to focus on their own job.
They don't seem very good at even that. They can barely post their agendas and minutes.
Thankyou,
Alan Bair
City resident, and voter.
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Blake Boyd <
Sunday, March 2, 2025 10:11 PM
Jones, Justin; Rivas, Jessica; Gordo, Victor; Masuda, Gene; Lyon, Jason; Hampton, Tyron; Cole, Rick; Chapman, Justin; City_Council_District_Liaisons; PublicComment- AutoResponse; Madison, Steve; Sullivan, Noreen
Agenda Item 8 Monday, Mar 3
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromi. Learn why this is important [ i ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Pasadena City Council:
I hope this message finds you well.
As wisely reasoned by Pasadena Housing Providers and many others, I urge you to approve an affirmative defense to keep fire victims housed, but with the following safeguards:
1) To set an initial period of six months as unanimously approved by the Rent Board on February 6th, which can then be extended if necessary; 2) To charge City staff with developing mechanisms to help landlords with the costs of managing without rental payments for an extended period of time; 3) To require more than "self-certification" of financial hardship by affected tenants, as this type of attestation was severely abused during the Covid eviction moratorium.
These changes will allow housing providers to continue to invest in Pasadena, rather than encouraging them to get out of the business altogether.
Thankyou and I lookforwardto hearingyour discussion.
Blessings to you and your families!
Blake Boyd
Lone Star Properties
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 ^Catifornia ADartment Assocation
3/3/25
Mayor Victor Gordo & City Council
City of Pasadena
VIA Email
RECEIVED
^'wle'^9:56
CITY Ci.£^
C^OF PAS&OENA
Re: Recommendation for Emergency Eviction Defense for Tenants Impacted by the Eaton Fire Dear Mayor Gordo and Council Members:
The California Apartment Association represents local housing providers, operators and suppliers along with business owners and real estate industry experts who are involved with a range of rental properties from those that offer single-family residences to large apartment communities. Our members provide a obtainablehousing throughout Los Angeles County.
We strongly urge the City Council to align with Los Angeles County's newly passed emergency tenant protections rather than pursuing a separate eviction defense ordinance. The County's ordinance already applies to Pasadena, ensuring tenant protections without the need for additional local measures.
A separate ordinance would create confusion for both tenants and housing providers. Simply following the County's action ensures a uniform standard throughout the region and avoids the complexity seen during COVID-era policies. Additionally, similar pandemic-era policies are still being litigated.
As a statewide public policy association, CAA offers proven solutions for the rental housing industry.
We serve as a resource for the City Council and staff on housing policy.
Sincerely,
Matthew Buck
Vice President of Public Affairs
California Apartment Association
3/3/2025
ItemS
Jomsky, Mark
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Denise Robb
Monday, March 3, 2025 6:38 AM
Thyret, Pam; Thyret, Pam; Jomsky, Mark
Agenda item 8, and support of eviction moratorium
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you frnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear Councilmember Lyon, Ms. Thyret and Mr. Jomsky,
I am writing in favor of agenda item 8. Unfortunately, I can't be there today. I'm heading to Sacramento for the march in March tomorrow so I'll probably be asleep by the time agenda item 8 comes up.
I'm writing to you in favor of an eviction moratorium.
As the PTA president for Blair middle/high school I can tell you that we have 58 families who lost their homes and all their belongings. We've been diligently getting everything they own replaced, but the one thing we've struggled with is trying to find them housing.
This is not a time to evict anyone. We should put everything on pause until we can get some semblance of normality.
Anything you can do to help people not lose their homes would be appreciated. We were struggling before the fires to find affordable housing so it's much worse now as I'm sure you all know.
So please support the Rent board vote.
Sincerely,
Denise
Sent from myiPhone
DeniseRobb,Ph.D.
Professor of Political Science,
Pierce College; and
Joshua's Mommy
<SThose who can make you believe absurdities can make
you commit atrocities.
(Possibly Voltaire)
99 3/3/2025
ItemS
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ellen Finkelpearl
Monday, March 3, 2025 10:59 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
tenant protections against evictions
[ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear City Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the recommendations of the Pasadena Rental Housing Board fora temporary emergency ordinance providing an affirmative defense against eviction for tenants financially impacted by the Eaton Fire. While thousands of our neighbors in Pasadena and Altadena have lost their homes, many have also lost their employment. This was a catastrophic event and nobody should be profiting from it; we all need to share the burden. In addition, the City Council should take measures to ensure that landlords detoxify their rental dwellings. For that matter, Pasadena needs to do much more to help residents determine the level of toxicity around us. My brother contracted lymphoma in NYC as a result of the 9/11 attack, as did many others.. The government lied to the residents living near the site, saying there was nothing toxic to worry about. If Pasadena fails to force landlords to detoxify their rentals and if the city does not conduct a thorough investigation of the presence of toxic substances, the city will be at fault in not protecting residents.
Thank you for your attention.
Ellen Finkelpearl
Pasadena 91104
3/3/2025
Item 8
1 IVIcMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mellem, Araceli
Monday, March 3, 2025 11:56 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
FW: Impact of Eviction Moratorium Post Eaton Fire
From: Brian Abernathy •
Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 11:26 AM
To: City_Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Impact of Eviction Moratorium Post Eaton Fire
I
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromLearn why this is important [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear Pasadena City Councilmembers,
In the immediate aftermath of the Eaton Fire, I and my staff dedicated significant resources to providing housingfor displaced residents. For over a month, I personally worked 65+ hour weeks to expedite the preparation of rental units. My team also worked tirelessly, completing remodels in days that would typically require 1 -3 months. This effort was undertaken despite three of our staff members being directly impacted by the fire themselves.
We successfully housed at least a dozen families who lost their homes. However, I am now deeply concerned about the potential extension of the eviction moratorium for non-payment of rent. This policy appears to undermine the very efforts of individuals and businesses who stepped up to assist during a crisis.
We prioritized providing immediate housing solutions, often at significant personal and professional sacrifice. An extended eviction moratorium risks discouraging such proactive responses in future emergencies.
Therefore, I strongly urge the City Council not to extend the eviction moratorium beyond the currently established six-month period mandated by the county.
Sincerely,
Brian Abernathy
SGV Management, LLC
133 E Duarte Rd, Arcadia, CA 91006
626-574-0828x6
www.sgvmanagement.com
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mellem, Araceli
Monday, March 3, 2025 1 1:56 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
FW: Please oppose tonight's Pasadena City Council Agenda Item 8 -—Original Message-—
From: Ahni D Dodge
Sent: Monday, March 3, 2025 11:04 AM
To: City_Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Please oppose tonight's Pasadena City Council Agenda Item 8 [Some people who received this message don't often get email from https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
am why this is important at
[ ,.f, ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear Pasadena City Councilmembers:
Please oppose tonight's City Council Agenda Item 8. A City eviction moratorium (a/k/a, eviction defense) is unnecessary as the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors just passed a countywide eviction moratorium/defense on Tuesday, February 25th that is now in effect and a City-specific moratorium will only cause confusion.
The County's new countywide eviction moratorium/defense resolution covers rents in ALL 88 incorporated cities, including Pasadena, as well the unincorporated areas.
A new city-specific eviction moratorium will only cause huge amounts of confusion among renters and rental housing providers leading to improper implementation and compliance issues.
Please oppose tonight's City Council Agenda Item 8.
Thank you!
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 FAA
Foothill Aparbnent Association
596 N. Lake St. ste. 204
Pasadena, CA 91101
JRECEIVED
?Q?5HAR-3 pH^:o7
..cm/c!- KCITY OF PASADENAMarch 2, 2025
Pasadena City Council
100 N. Garfield Avenue Rm S228
Pasadena, CA 91109
RE: Opposition to Agenda Item 8 RECOMMENDATION AND REQUEST BY THE
PASADENA RENTAL HOUSING BOARD TO ADOPT A TEMPORARY, EMERGENCY
ORDINANCE FOR EMERGENCY EVICTION DEFENSE FOR TENANTS IMPACTED BY THE
EATON FIRE
Dear Mayor Gordo and Members of the City Council:
We oppose Agenda Item 8 as the recommendation is both unnecessary and ill-conceived. The County of Los Angeles has enacted a similar affirmative defense for all ofL.A. County including the 88 municipalities it encompasses. The terms for attestation in the County protection are well defined, whereas the recommendation from the PRHB sites no terms. The timeframe and lack of any funding to offer directly to landlords is also a glaring oversite. If the PRHB is serious about keeping people housed these would not have been omitted.
The residential rental owners of this city should not be mandated to bear this kind of financial burden without support.
Sincerely,
Lean Khachooni
Foothill Apartment Association
3/3/2025
ItemS
McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mellem, Araceli
Monday, March 3, 2025 12:09 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
FW: Rent Moratorium
From: Shawna Saperstein
Sent: Saturday, March 1, 2025 10:07 AM
To: City_Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Rent Moratorium
Some people who received this message don't often get email fromn why this is important [ I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear Council Members,
I am a housing provider in Pasadena. I am writing regarding Item 8 on the agenda, regarding a 12 month eviction moratorium for wildfire victims. Please consider the negative and unfair impact this could have on housing providers. Like many Mom and Pop providers, I cannot afford the financial burden of having tenants not pay rent for a year, and then having to take them to court when the year is up if they are unable or unwilling to pay what they owe. I, and many others, had to do this at the end oftheCovid moratorium, which was not that long ago. I believe victims of the wildfires should receive help, but this help should come from city, state, and federal funds, not small business owners who do not have the finances to cover tenants' rent for a year. It is also concerning that tenants can self-attest that they were affected by the fires. This will inevitably Lead to abuse of the moratorium, as it did during Covid.
Thank you for your consideration.
ShawnaSaperstein
3/3/2025
ItemS
1 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Morales, Margo
Monday, March 3, 2025 12:39 PM
Rivas, Jessica; Public Comment
AR 8 : Strong Opposition to 1 Year Eviction Moratorium
From: Cara Fano
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2025 4:27 PM
To: Gordo, Victor <[email protected]>; Bell, Cushon <[email protected]>; DerBoghossian, Megheti <[email protected]>; Barrios, Lisa <[email protected]>; Sullivan, Noreen <[email protected]>; Morales, Margo<[email protected]>; Chapman, Justin <[email protected]>; Thyret, Pam <[email protected]> Subject: Strong Opposition to 1 Year Eviction Moratorium Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important [ ! ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear CounciLmembers,
I am writing to strongly oppose the Pasadena 1 Year Eviction Moratorium as it will only create more issues for Pasadena and it's residents for the following reasons:
A City eviction moratorium (a/k/a, eviction defense) is unnecessary as the L.A. County Board of Supervisors just passed a countywide eviction moratorium/defense on Tuesday, February 25th that is now in effect and a City specific moratorium will only cause confusion. The County's new countywide eviction moratorium/defense resolution covers renters in ALL 88 incorporated cities, including Pasadena, as well as the unincorporated areas. A new city specific eviction moratorium will only cause huge amounts of confusion among renters and rental housing providers leading to improper implementation and compliance issues.
Rental housing providers, especially mom-and-pop owners, cannot afford to carry a non- paying renter for 18 months (6-month moratorium plus 18-month repayment period) as required under the County's eviction moratorium MUCH LESS for 24 months (12-month moratorium plus 12-month repayment period) as proposed in Pasadena as a City eviction moratorium. As such, many smaller owners will be driven out of the rental housing business by this new mandate, and their affordable rental properties will be taken off the market. Developers will convert the buildings to for-sale luxury condominiums or other luxury housing. This will only further fuel Pasadena's gentrification. Pasadena should not pursue a City eviction moratorium that will only make this problem far worse.
The County's eviction moratorium already runs too long as it will allow renters to accrue a mountain of back rent over a six-month period (February 1, 2025 - July 31, 2025) extending it to 12-months will only make it DOUBLY unlikely that renters will be able to pay it back without direct rental assistance and/or proper planning. An eviction moratorium does not stop a renter 1 3/3/2025
ltem8
from having to pay for their housing, it merely delays the payment date. As such, it is a form of "rent banking" that most renters are unable to properly manage.
The County's eviction moratorium sets up renters for failure by failing to include a repayment plan for the 12-month repayment period. Without requiring renters to pay at least 10% monthly of what is owed, renters will be unprepared when the repayment period ends. As such, they will face civil lawsuits and debt collectors. A City specific eviction moratorium will have even worse results if the moratorium lasts even longer.
The County's eviction moratorium invites fraud and abuse by unscrupulous attorneys and irresponsible renters. It does not require renters to show verifiable proof of financial impact in the form of rental assistance applications, unemployment applications or lists ofjob-seeking activities.
These activities are already required to be conducted in the moratorium but without requiring documentation of these actions, unscrupulous individuals could fraudulently claim the eviction defense. A City specific eviction moratorium will have the same problems unless documentation is required.
BETTER ALTERNATIVES
If the City wants to help low-income renters financially impacted by the wildfires, then it should start a new direct rental assistance program. The County has already started two new programs, the Region Worker Relief Fund and the Household Relief Grant program.
The City should also start a new grant program for mom-and-pop rental housing providers with 20 or fewer units struggling to pay costs due to lack of rent from non-payment renters utilizing the new County eviction moratorium. The City needs to help small owners stay in business providing needed affordable housing.
Please take the above into consideration.
Best,
Cara Fano
2 Iraheta, Alba
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Morales, Margo
Monday, March 3, 2025 12:44 PM
Rivas, Jessica; Public Comment
AR8 FW: STOP THE INCREASE OF THE EVICTION MORATORIUM
From: Sharon Tsukamoto < ~ " •>
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2025 8:14 PM
To: Morales, Margo <[email protected]>
Subject: STOP THE INCREASE OF THE EVICTION MORATORIUM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
DEAR JESS,
A City eviction moratorium (a/k/a, eviction defense) is unnecessary as the L.A. County Board of Supervisors just passed a countywide eviction moratorium/defense on Tuesday, February 25th that is now in effect and a City moratorium will only cause confusion. The new countywide eviction moratorium/defense covers renters in all 88 incorporated cities, including Los Angeles as well as the unincorporated areas. A new city eviction moratorium will only cause huge amounts of confusion among renters and rental housing providers alike leading to improper use and compliance issues.
Rental housing providers, especially mom-and-pop owners, cannot afford to carry a non- paying renter for 18 months (6-month moratorium plus 18-month repayment period) as required under the County's eviction moratorium MUCH LESS for 24 months (12-month moratorium plus 12-month repayment period) as proposed in Los Angeles as a City eviction moratorium.
The County's eviction moratorium already runs too long as it will allow renters to accrue a mountain of back rent over a six-month period (February 1, 2025 - July 31, 2025) extending it to 12-months will only make it DOUBLY unlikely that renters will be able to pay it back without direct rental assistance and/or proper planning. An eviction moratorium does not stop a renter from having to pay for their housing, it merely delays the payment date. As such, it is a form of "rent banking" that most renters are unable to properly manage.
The County's eviction moratorium sets up renters for failure by failing to include a repayment plan for the 12-month repayment period. Without requiring renters to pay at least 10% monthly of what is owed, renters will be unprepared when the repayment period ends. As such, they will face civil lawsuits and debt collectors. A City specific eviction moratorium will have even worse results if the moratorium lasts even longer.
3/3/2025
Item 8
1 The County's eviction moratorium invites fraud and abuse by unscrupulous attorneys and irresponsible renters. It does not require renters to show verifiable proof of financial impact in the form of rental assistance applications, unemployment applications or lists ofjob-seeking activities.
These activities are already required to be conducted in the moratorium but without requiring documentation of these actions, unscrupulous individuals could fraudulently claim the eviction defense. A City specific eviction moratorium will have the same problems unless documentation is required.
BETTER ALTERNATIVES
If the City wants to help low-income renters financially impacted by the wildfires, then it should start a new direct rental assistance program. The County has already started two new programs, the Region Worker Relief Fund and the Household Relief Grant program.
The City should also start a new grant program for mom-and-pop rental housing providers with 20 or fewer units struggling to pay costs due to lack of rent from non-payment renters utilizing the new County eviction moratorium. The City needs to help small owners stay in business providing needed affordable housing.
Think about what you are doing to the h-lousing Providers. We have worked hard to buy a property. It took a long time and sweat equity.
Sharon &CraigTsukamoto
2 McMillan, Acquanette (Netta)
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ann-Marie
Monday, March 3, 2025 1:45 PM
Blake Boyd
Jones, Justin; Rivas, Jessica; Gordo, Victor; Masuda, Gene; Lyon, Jason; Hampton, Tyron; Cole, Rick; Chapman, Justin; City_Council_District_Liaisons; PublicComment- AutoResponse; Madison, Steve; Sullivan, Noreen; PublicComment-AutoResponse; Robin Salzer; Greg Anderson
Re: Agenda Item 8 Monday, Mar 3
[A ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button viewarticle "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear city Council members,
As a Housing provider in the city, I ask that you please be considerate and recognize how important it is to have a rental housing supply in the city. The restrictions and regulations that you and the Rental registry board are putting upon us are becoming more than onerous. If you would like to still have a broad housing supply, you really do need to listen to voices of the housing providers which provide an extremely necessary product. We are essential providers for the strength and stability of the City Of Pasadena and we need to be recognized as such.
There are many different subsets within the housing supply community. There are very high-end units.
There are mid range units. There are very affordable units due to housing providers not keeping up with the market. There really has been a supplyfor every price range and level of maintenance.
Measure H has sadly distorted the marketplace. And after the onslaught of regulations during the pandemic, most every Housing provider has now raised their rents with extreme regularity on an annual basis because they have to. To keep up with the rising insurance cost, property taxes, maintenance cost, utility cost all which have been on a substantial uptick in rates.
Housing insurance changes have been so substantial that if you are lucky, you still have an insurance policy, but with that insurance policy, your cost could have gone up anywhere between 3 to 10 times the amountofyour policy in prior years. If you are unlucky, you have lost your insurance policy coverage and now are stuck looking for an insurance carrier that will provide insurance for you and in the worst case, you can get California fair plan, which is very expensive and covers basically nothing.
When you are considering regulating the housing industry more tonight, think very carefully before you put on more onerous restrictions. This is such an important business thatyou have in the city and if you destroy the ability for the small individual property owners commonly known as MOM and Pop Housing providers, you will find yourself without the broad housing supply in all the different ranges that we once used to have and the majority of it will be either corporately owned or government owned and run. That will not provide a healthy environment for our beautiful and fair City Of Pasadena.
Hon. Ann-Marie Villicana
Former Councilmember, district 6
1 3/3/2025
ltem8
Broker-associate,Attorney-at-taw
Sent from myiPhone
Engel&Volkers
On Mar 2, 2025, at 10:11 PM, Blake Boyd <[email protected]> wrote:
Pasadena City Council:
I hope this message finds you well.
As wisely reasoned by Pasadena Housing Providers and many others, I urge you to approve an affirmative defense to keep fire victims housed, but with the following safeguards:
1) To set an initial period of six months as unanimously approved by the Rent Board on February 6th, which can then be extended if necessary; 2) To charge City staff with developing mechanisms to help landlords with the costs of managingwithout rental payments for an extended period of time; 3) To require more than "self-certification" of financial hardship by affected tenants, as this type of attestation was severely abused during the Covid eviction moratorium.
These changes will allow housing providers to continue to invest in Pasadena, rather than encouraging them to get out of the business altogether.
Thankyou and I lookforward to hearingyour discussion.
Blessings to you and your families!
Blake Boyd
Lone Star Properties
2 APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES
AAGLA
II,
"Great Apartments Start Here!"
Janet M. Gagnon
Senior Vice President, Government
Affairs & External Relations
[email protected]
213.384.4131; Ext. 309
March 3, 2025
Via Electronic Mail
Hon. Mayor Victor Gordo
and the Members of the Pasadena City Council
Pasadena City Hall
100 North Garfield Avenue, Room S249
Pasadena, California 9
Re: Eviction Moratorium - Agenda Item 8
Dear Mayor Gordo and Members of the Pasadena City Council:
p
Ii
Sp
0^m
^
>
f~3
c5
''s*a"i
s
LJ
3 rv>
£~
GO
^7
m
0 m
<
m
0 The Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (AAGLA) represents rental housing providers throughout Los Angeles, Ventura and San Bernardino counties. More than 80% of our membership are mom-and-pop owners with 20 or fewer units. We have extensive experience with the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors' recent resolution and are eager to share our knowledge with you.
Eviction Moratorium fa/k/a. Eviction Defense)
The Pasadena Rental Housing Board (PRHB) held a "special meeting" on Monday, February 27 during which the eviction moratorium received little discussion and was forced through by Board Chair, Ryan Bell over the questions of other Board members. Despite the PRHB report that the vote was "unanimous", there was no substantive discussion regarding the recently passed resolution by the County Board of Supervisors nor any specific aspects that warranted additional consideration by the Pasadena City Council.
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution on Tuesday, February 25th that created a new countywide eviction moratorium for all 88 incorporated cities, including Pasadena as well as the unincorporated areas. It is already in effect countywide.
This moratorium is focused on protecting renters that were financially impacted by wildfires by as little as 10% of their average monthly household income. This is already an extremely low requirement as it means that an individual could lose as little as 1 in 10 jobs as an independent consultant and still qualify for the eviction defense.
The eviction defense requires a renter to provide written notice to the owner under penalty of perjury that they are: (i) currently seeking new work, (ii) applying for unemployment benefits or (iii) applying for rental assistance from FEMA, Los Angeles County's two new funds (Worker Relief Fund or Household Relief 03/03/2025
Item 8
APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES
AAGLA
//I
"Great Apartments Start Here!"
Grant), or other sources. This was included to encourage individuals to actively seek new/additional work or other sources of funding to be able to stay current on their rent, if possible.
The eviction defense provides a 6-month eviction moratorium with an additional 12-month repayment period. This means that rental housing providers would be without the owed rent for up to 18 months. This will cause extreme damage to mom-and-pop owners already struggling with mass amounts of unpaid rent due to the CO VID-19 moratoriums. An even longer eviction moratorium of 1 year was originally considered and rejected based on the fact that it would create such a huge amount of back rent that it was extremely unlikely that any renter would be able to pay it back. This was a compromise between 3-months as an "urgency" item to allow a brief pause to allow renters to get back on their feet without falling too deeply into debt.
Unfortunately, the resolution does not contain a repayment plan by requiring a minimum payback percentage per month during the repayment period. So, it is possible that some renters will either forget or choose not to pay the back rent owed despite receiving new work or rental assistance and wind up owing the full amount at the end of the repayment period.
While the resolution does not include all the safeguards that we would have liked to see included, it does represent a balance between allowing individuals financially impacted by the wildfires to temporarily fall behind in rent that is owed without accruing so much that repayment would be nearly impossible.
We urge the Council to promote the existing Countywide resolution rather than creating an additional City ordinance to avoid confusion amongst renters and owners that would result in improper utilization and compliance issues. We also urge the Council to consider creating its own direct rental assistance program either for financially impacted low-income renters and/or small housing providers with renters unable to pay the rent due to the wildfires.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Please feel free to reach out to me directly by telephone at (213) 384-4131; Ext. 309 or via electronic mail at ianet(%aagla.org.
Sincerely,
•^^fee9fzon'
^
Janet M. Gagnon, Esq.
CC: Daniel Yukelson, Executive Director, Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles
Iraheta, Alba
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lorynne Young < >
Monday, March 3, 2025 3:54 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Protect tenants who are victims of the Eaton Fire
ISome people who received this message don't often get email fronLearn why this is important ^\] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Dear Mayor Gordo and Council Members;
I am a tenant living in Justin Jones district. I am extremely worried about my fellow tenants who have lost their apartments in the recent fire, or whose units have suffered damage from toxic smoke and ash. Many landlords are using this damage as an excuse to evict tenants with no assurance that they can return to their apartments, or are simply refusing to do any remediation for the smoke and ash damage. This is clearly a move by greedy landlords to use the horrific wildfire as an excuse to raise rents beyond the allowable limits under Pasadena rent control.
I am also a member of the Vestry at All Saints Episcopal Church and chair of the Peace and Justice Ministries. As you know we were deeply involved in helping those who were evacuated and/or lost their homes in the fire. Helping those around us who are in need is basic to our Christian faith, and should be foremost in the work of the City Council as we strive to recover from the fire and make Pasadena whole again.
I urge you to take the necessary action to protect tenants from illegal rent increases and unfair evictions, and to force landlords to clean apartments that suffered damage from the fire, toxic smoke and ash. Tenants deserve a clean, safe space to live in and must be guaranteed the right to return to their apartments at their current rent.
Sincerely,
Lorynne Young
sadena,91101
03/03/2025
Item 'S
1 Iraheta, Alba
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
cityclerk
Monday, March 3, 2025 4:37 PM
Iraheta, Alba; Jomsky, Mark; Robles, Sandra; Sabha, Tamer; McMillan, Acquanette (Netta); Soo, Christine; Ashikyan, Elizabeth; Padilla, Adrian FW: Council meeting item #8 - Monday March 3, 2025
From: Adam Bray-Ali
Sent: Monday, March J, 2025 4:35:54 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: cityclerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Council meeting item #8 - Monday March 3, 2025 CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button. For more information about the Phish Alert Button view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Good afternoon City Council,
This evening on your council agenda is a suggestion from the Rental Housing Board for a blanket moratorium on rent payments in the City of Pasadena for over a year. There are claims that this was a unanimous request by the Rental Housing Board but that is just the first of many lies and omissions you will discover as you ask questions on this topic today.
You and your council are being asked to vote on a Pasadena specific moratorium that allows every tenant in the city to claim they are impacted by the fire and not pay rent for a year. With no recourse by the property owner and no funding mechanism to make them whole. Everyone in the city has been impacted by the fires. On the day of the fire, we opened our doors to friends that Lost their home and for the past 2 months, other friends moved into an apartment I own nearby. In both cases, we haven't charged a penny and we opened our doors to those in need and know that many others have done the same. Based on the current rules across every city in LA County, any renter can self attest a hardship and not pay rent for 6 months. The reward for renting to people in this time of need is to potentially bankrupt them? Why would you want to make this harder in Pasadena's rental market? The combination of events that lead us to this moment are not the same as in March 2020 when you and your predecessors voted in an emergency moratorium when we faced a global pandemic but the people 'demanding' this are the same. The Rental Housing Board has been in place since May of 2023. In their charter is the task to develop a rental registration system and eviction tracking tool. You will see that nowhere in their public meetings or in the 'demand' for a moratorium on evictions for non-payment of rent is any verifiable data about what they are claiming is a crisis of eviction in the City of Pasadena.
Since November 2022, the law in the city requires that any eviction filing be registered with the Rental Housing Board. The board received at least $1,000,000 in City and Federal ARPA funds to develop these systems and has failed to complete the task leaving the city without any insights into the next phase of the longer term goal of the Chairman of the Rental Housing Board, Ryan Bell. ?^S3<3^2025
.tern y
1 Chairman Bell has been a man on a mission looking for any possible opportunity to socialize all rental housing, placing control of private property into the hands of his appointed board and claiming that our economy is based on destroying working class people. The reality is that Bell and several other members of the RHBare using the horrific fires of January 2025 towards their dream that no tenant be obligated to pay rent and that every small property owner in the city be driven into bankruptcy.
Others will write letters asking you to consider the economics, some may explain in great length how the moratoriums and rent freezes in our region harmed many property owners and exacerbated a Lack of housing in the community. Our neighbors from the Socialists of Caltech will undoubtedly arrive with their scarves and masks while espousing anti-seimitic phrases.
I encourage you to thank the Rental Housing Board for their suggestions, ask to see the data they control about eviction filings and question when they intend to pay the $1,000,000 back to Pasadena that the same Board members that wrote Measure H claimed would only be charged to Landlords in the city.
Thankyou,
Adam Bray-ALi
Ryan Bell
^Chairman
Pasadena Rental Housing Board
)<
Nominated by:
Steve Madison
Pasadena Vice Mayor
Apr 19,2023
[email protected]
^
Vf. rf-
^
626-744-4739 y.^~ <»••https://www.cityofpasadena.net/
district6/contact
December 21, 2022
"We were being cautious because we needed to win an
election and try to alienate as few people as possible while still being clear about what we were demanding."
"What I really wanted to tell developers and landlords
during the campaign was that our eventual goal is to
convert that housing into public housing."
-Ryan Bell
Click on the link or scan the QR code to know the story https://jacobin.com/2022/12/pasadena-
tenants-union-rent-control-measure-h-
organizing
-J
x
Paid for by Pasadena Housing Providers ID#1464386
representing the interests of Pasadena property owners. www.PasadenaHousingProviders.com
2 PASADENA RENTAL HOUSING BOARD CHAIRMAN AND
ISSQCIATES-
.Charles Xu.J^yafl-Bell
[EVICTIONS?
"HELLN0.1
^^/-*\ S-*»» r<
"JM•^ K•w
<9w? -Sr%<*
-*;
•y.
»: •t\^ ^
Bea RooneyPTU
BlauM*™liai!B
J
^
®
®
faizahm •
1/M.C A U
^K/^TK.
., c.WfS
2w fieply
Nw
^te-•rt
% ,A,
"Hii
^/VTS
A
tM IS TH
NST DISKSre i
1S18
LISM
/.'
^
<7 Q V
48 iik8»
ryanjbel! . Follow
Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
ryanjbell It was an honor to represent my
tenantsunion—@pasader>atenantsunion—at
this powerful ©igtenants rally at the Board of
Supervisors this morning. We demanded from
the Board of Supervisors an eviction
moratorium and rent freeze so folks can
from this emergency created by the LA
fires.
J*n 21, 2025
kesrstiny So proud of this work!
Rep !y
0 (3
R
Adam Bray-ALi
Coldwelt Banker Residential Brokerage
DRE#01859026
3