Comments
AFFORDABLE HOUSING - When Mayor Bass issued Executive Directive 1 (ED1) in December of 2022, on the surface it seemed like a good idea. I mean, building 100% “affordable housing” using streamlined, fast track approval located in all areas of Los Angeles....was an Abundant Housing and YIMBY dream come true! Shortly after the Mayor released ED 1, the Planning Dept received over 20,000 development proposals from for-profit developers to build “affordable housing.”
Cracks started showing up when neighborhoods zoned for single family homes protested that “affordable housing” projects up to 8 stories would be built in residential neighborhoods without parking for residents. Note that ED 1 does not allow community input, or appeals, thus the streamlining component.
Nevertheless, Mayor Bass and City Council members listened to their constituents, and probably hearing threats of lawsuits, Mayor Bass issued the first ED1 amendment in June 2023 which excluded single family home residential neighborhoods. However, some developers had applied for projects before the first amendment was issued, so the projects had to be built, otherwise the developers could claim “bait and switch.” Here come the lawsuits. YIMBY filed a couple of lawsuits against the City of Los Angeles.
On July 1, 2024 the second and third ED 1 amendments were issued excluding Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ) properties, hillside high fire zones, and protection for Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO) tenants and RSO buildings with 12 or more units. According to the Mayor’s team, of the more than 200 project applications filed, 10 were proposed in historic districts, and 10 were proposed on sites with 12 or more rent-controlled apartments. Abundant Housing and YIMBY were not very happy about these additional amendments.
Protecting rent stabilized tenants and rent stabilized housed seems like a no-brainer. I mean, tenants who are extremely, and very low income, who are living in RSO properties are the ones who need “affordable housing.” So why are RSO tenants being threatened with eviction under ED 1? According to a state Government Code, RSO buildings where tenants live are prohibited from being demolished through ministerial, streamlined approval. So why are the Mayor’s office and the Planning Dept so keen to push these projects through? Mayor Bass said she wanted to avoid tenant displacement and prevent homelessness, so what gives with this crazy-making policy?
A brief definition of terms is necessary to understand that “affordable housing” (which is different from the Rent Stabilization Ordinance) places restrictions on how much rent can be charged and sets eligibility of units based on income. Presently the income eligibility for a majority of ED 1 units is at 80% of AMI with some units at 120% of AMI, which is basically for moderate to higher income earners. AMI is Area Median Income, an LA County metric. AMI for 2023 and 2024 was $98,200, so 80% of $98,200 = $78,560 per year. 120% of AMI = $117,840 per year. So tenants eligible for ED 1 units would have to fall into those income categories.
“Affordable housing” requires a deed-restricted covenant which will expire after 55 years for ED 1 projects, so the “affordable” aspect is time limited, and then the units revert to market rate.
I agree that LA City needs more housing that is affordable to its residents. However, in my view ED1 does not provide clear and specific guidelines for affordable income levels, and it does not provide existing tenants with anti-displacement protections. Why not provide income eligibility for tenants with incomes at 30-50% of AMI? Tenants at the extremely and very low income levels really need “affordable housing.” Is it because ED 1 developments are not subsidized by government funding?
Developers love that. They don’t have to pull together financing and get Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) to fund extremely and very low income units.
It seems that the “build more” housing contingent that support ED 1 have complacency toward RSO no- fault tenant evictions and demolition of RSO housing. It could be that the “build more” pro-housing contingent thinks more housing needs to be built with the expectation that as newer structures are built, older housing will “trickle down” to lower income renters. Hmmm...how long will that take...20 or 30 years, if ever? Could it be that the “build more” contingent would like to destroy rent-stabilized buildings in Los Angeles?
If ED 1 policies are put into effect... those policies may lead to tenants becoming homeless: Tenants who are no-fault evicted under ED 1 and given a small amount of relocation may find themselves in financial straits since relocation amounts may be insufficient to fund sustainable alternative housing in an expensive rental housing market. Housing today costs 10 times the average income today, and a majority of tenants are paying more than 50% of their income on rent.
ED 1 policies boast limited tenant protections in the form of Right of Return and Replacement Units which were codified under California state laws SB 330 and SB 8. The problem is units under construction may not be move-in ready for returning tenants for at least three to four years, assuming that the project is built at all. Policies such as Right of Return and Replacement Units for tenants who have been displaced do not bridge the four-year housing gap between eviction and rehousing. Therefore, it is very possible that extremely and very low income tenants, seniors, and disabled may become homeless as a result of implementation of ED 1.
Tenants who occupy LA City RSO properties are afforded protections at the City and State level, but it appears that ED 1 attempts to preempt City and State laws that afford protections to tenants. ED1’s 3rd revision only provides eviction and demolition protections for RSO buildings with 12 or more units.
What about the tenants living in RSO buildings with 9, 10 or 11 units?
If ED 1 is attempting to correct a housing affordability imbalance and provide more “affordable housing,” a reasonable and rational approach needs to be implemented that does not evict and displace extremely and very low income tenants, does not destroy naturally occurring RSO affordable housing, will provide equitable income eligibility for tenants at 30% and 50% of AMI, and offer the remainder of units at 80% of AMI.
(Jane Demian, former Co-Chair of the Housing and Homelessness Committee of the Eagle Rock Neighborhood Council, is a dedicated advocate for tenants' rights and homelessness issues, actively volunteering to support housing equity and tenant protections.)
