www.montereycountyweekly.com april 27-may 3, 2023 MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY 17 It was before dawn on Monday morning, April 24, when 52 people gathered in a Salinas parking lot at 5:30 to board a bus bound for Sacramento. The coalition of community members came from Salinas, Greenfield, Seaside, Marina and more, and they came from different walks of life, but went to lobby at the State Capitol for the day with a shared message: Housing is a human right. More specifically, the local group—organized by nonprofits Building Healthy Communities and the Center for Community Advocacy—joined hundreds of activists to urge lawmakers to pass Senate Bill 567, which would update provisions from the California Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (Assembly Bill 1482), which sunsets in 2030. Importantly, the 2019 law caps annual rent increases at 10 percent, and SB 567 would cap them at 5 percent. According to a bill analysis prepared for a State Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on April 25, the 2019 law has not fixed the housing crisis. “The premise behind this bill is that while the Tenant Protection Act of 2019 offered some important support to tenants caught up in California’s housing affordability crisis, experience and reflection have revealed ways in which the Act needs to be strengthened if it is to provide genuine protection against heavy rent burdens and families falling into homelessness,” the analysis states. “In the time since AB 1482 passed, rental housing affordability in California has not improved and homelessness has continued to grow. The two things are highly correlated.” Of course, you didn’t need to read a legislative brief to know that things have not gotten better for renters—the power of observation is more than enough. But maybe it’s hitting bottom that is motivating tenants to organize like never before. The list of organizations supporting SB 567 is at least 50 long. The short list of opponents includes the state Apartment Association, Association of Realtors and Mortgage Bankers Association. The Center for Community Advocacy’s executive director, Natalie Herendeen, says 52 people were motivated to board a bus at 5:30am to lobby for renters’ rights because things have gotten so bad on so many levels. “Ten years ago you could find reasonable rent,” she says. Now, housing is prohibitively expensive, and even expensive housing is in terrible condition; CCA organizers hear complaints about mold and lead paint. And rental housing at any price point and in any condition is hard to find. With inflation, even tenants who get annual raises at work are finding it hard to keep up with rising rent, even under the protections of AB 1482 and its 10-percent cap. “People from San Jose are coming down, but it’s not their fault—nurses and teachers are being priced out of San Jose,” Herendeen says. “It’s a multitude of factors, all compounding. It’s a perfect storm. People are pissed off because all their money is going to live in a dump.” In Sacramento, the Monterey County cohort split up to meet with various lawmakers. Herendeen’s team met with staff of State Sen. John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, Assemblymember Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, and Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria, D-Fresno. Herendeen was encouraged by those meetings, and is hopeful about a comprehensive housing solution that builds upon AB 1492. There is good cause to be hopeful. On April 25, the Senate Judiciary Committee (of which Laird is a member) passed SB 567, albeit in a stripped-down form without the 5-percent rent cap. The fight will continue. The local group was invited to Sacramento by Housing Now, a coalition of over 150 organizations. They also rallied in support of Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10, which would declare housing as a right. There is movement locally too. The coalition that went to Sacramento included Tony Barrera and Orlando Osornio, both members of Salinas City Council, which on April 4 became the first city in Monterey County to approve a residential rent registry. On April 18, Monterey City Council voted 4-1 to pursue a similar registry and explore rent stabilization. Each of these measures, at a local and state level, is just part of the solution, and each will be negotiated (as SB 567 already has been in committee). But if the emerging coalition of tenants stays energized, there is real hope for real change. Sara Rubin is the Weekly’s editor. Reach her at sara@mcweekly.com. House and Home As state lawmakers rethink tenants’ rights, renters get organized. By Sara Rubin Clam Chatter…Squid has enough to worry about, so Squid has tried in vain to ignore the rise of artificial intelligence. Squid covered Squid’s statocysts (akin to human ears) and sang “la, la, la” loudly when the results of a survey of AI experts was released in March, giving humanity a 1-in-10 chance against AI taking over and causing its extinction. (The study did not explore the odds for cephalopods in this hypothetical future scenario.) Squid does know something about AI chatbots, which is why Squid became suspicious of an article published April 24 on California.com, a privately owned website, about living in and visiting Monterey. The introduction boldly states: “From majestic ocean views to world-class aquariums, Monterey’s charm is undeniable.” Aquariums, plural? Squid supposes one could say that technically there are multiple aquariums within the Monterey Bay Aquarium, but no one living talks like that. The article goes on to talk about “Monterey” while swerving in and out of Pacific Grove. To test Squid’s theory, Squid used an online tool to check the article and it came back as likely written by AI. (Squid cross-checked a recent column of Squid’s own, which was detected as likely written by a human—Squid is trying not to be offended.) Squid really knew something was awry when the article listed as a “delicious culinary delight” a slice of clam pizza. Squid regularly indulges in clams, but even Squid knows clams on pizza is a bad idea. Silly robot. BE LIKE A TREE…If a tree falls, but nobody expected the tree to fall, then is anyone responsible for the tree falling? Squid has thought this riddle over for days now in the hope of reaching some kind of enlightenment, yet the answer remains elusive. This is the same riddle that Monterey County posed to Carmel property owner Gary Bruner. In January, Bruner filed a claim against the county after winter storms caused a large tree branch—located across the street from his property, on unincorporated county land—to fall on his backyard fence, flattening it. Bruner was left to fork over $500 to repair the damage, according to his claim—not a bad deal counting labor and materials, if you ask Squid, but a decent chunk of change regardless. Bruner’s claim was denied by the county, he tells Squid’s colleague, on the grounds that “there was no previous notification of the tree that fell on my property having a potential of falling.” Squid can see the legal reasoning behind this argument: That the county is only liable for fallen trees that were deemed a potential hazard yet not dealt with. But the riddle gets more complicated, because isn’t that pretty much every tree, everywhere? Squid is left to ponder this mystery, one as deep as the Monterey Bay Canyon. the local spin SQUID FRY THE MISSION OF MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY IS TO INSPIRE INDEPENDENT THINKING AND CONSCIOUS ACTION, ETC. “It’s a perfect storm.” Send Squid a tip: squid@mcweekly.com
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjAzNjQ1NQ==