Will a proposed housing "harassment" ordinance stop harassment caused by city employees?
Los Angeles 5/21/21

LA Council File 14-0268-S13. I support the draft Harassment by Landlord ordinance, but   I don’t think the city government Mayor and Council are serious about stopping harassment of tenants.

 

(1) See CCC 1942.5 that addresses “retaliation” by landlords.

 

(2) See “A landlord of a dwelling may not demand rent, collect rent, issue a notice of a rent increase, or issue a three-day notice to pay rent or quit pursuant to subdivision (2) of Section 1161 of the Code of Civil Procedure , if all of the following conditions exist prior to the landlord's demand or notice…”.CCC section 1942.4.

 

(3) See CCC section 1941.1.

 

(4) See California Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3- SUBSTANDARD HOUSING.

 

(5) See California civil code section 1941.1.

 

(6) IMO administrative agencies may engage in opinion, rather than fact finding, as opposed to courts that are supposed to be the finders of facts.

 

(7) The proposed ordinance is designed to make tenants jump thru hoops.

 

(8) I filed city code violation complaints numbered 750967 and 783277 which include the allegation of harassment. Neither were addressed by city employees.

 

(9) Many tenants would not be able to afford the time and cost of litigation to sue landlords 

 

(10) It would be more sincere and efficient   to pass a law that gives the city the authority to sue the landlords on the tenants’ behalf. I think the city has that authority already.

 

(11) If the landlord offers a tenant buyout agreement, it needs to be filed with the city immediately, not 60 days after the tenant vacates. To have the landlord/tenant file after 60 days of vacating the unit is detrimental to the tenant.

 

(12) “We call "must" and "must not" words of obligation. "Must" is the only word that imposes a legal obligation on your readers to tell them something is mandatory. Also, "must not" are the only words you can use to say something is prohibited. Who says so and why? Nearly every jurisdiction has held that the word "shall" is confusing because it can also mean "may, will or must.”  Even the Supreme Court ruled that when the word "shall" appears in statutes, it means “may." The wording of the proposed ordinance must be “must” (instead of shall) or use the word “mandatory”. The 42 or more city paid attorneys should know this.

 

(13) I have made numerous code violation and harassment complaints to the city since 2014 only to be met by deaf ears. I sued the city government in 2016 (2:16-cv-03236-JLS-ASW) to stop the city government practice of systemic housing discrimination and harassment. From comments to this file number, the harassment of tenants by city employees still exists to this day. Filing over 200 code violation complaints have not stopped the harassment against me.  The housing committee and government are not serious about stopping landlord harassment. When I recently reported code violations to the city government, I was harassed by code enforcement employees who tried to stop me from reporting the violations and retaliated against me and refused to make the inspection. Numerous tenants face this kind of city employee conduct every day with no effective remedy available. Until you fix the problem of city employee ethics code violations and biased enforcement, your proposed harassment ordinance will be a waste of time and tax dollars.

 

(14)   Excerpt Attachment to city of Los Angeles Code Violation Complaint.  “BLACK CITY EMPLOYEE SAYS BLACKS NOT ENTITLED TO FAIR HOUSING.”  

 

”The intercom system at this local address remains un repaired. The intercoms for various units  …do not functions as intended. A REAP complaint was filed with the city regarding the lack of intercom maintenance and lack of assignment to a tandem parking still for tenants unit 9, both who are Black Americans.

 

Now we have an African American and Asian woman US Vice President but she does not have the power that housing discrimination has in this city….the rear door to the building does not function as intended, …

 

The rear inside stairs to the building are wobbly and unsafe. There is an un permitted structure outside the building of which I sent pictures to you as it is off the parking lot. Under state law below, the code inspector has jurisdiction over "any building or portion thereof”.

 

The state law says "including but not limited to" and "general dilapidation or improper maintenance.” The city law LAMC says housing services are "including but not limited to”. State law also gives the code enforcement authority over "any nuisance”. (15) I believe the real reason for their refusal to inspect is in retaliation because I have complained about city and owner housing discrimination and because I have made code violation complaints against this property, and because I am Black.”

 

BY G.JUAN JOHNSON, MAYORAL CANDIDATE LONG BEACH 1994 AND 1998.

 

See May 18, 2021 email to Mayor and Council re refusal to inspect, at 10:44 am.

https://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=14-0268-S13

The comments above may appear at the link above on the city clerk website. I submitted other comments on January 21, 2019 (see clerk link)  and around May 20, 2021)

LOS ANGELES NEEDS MANDATORY 85% AFFORDABLE AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING

LOS ANGELES. We need to stop being hypocritical about housing. I object to the project at 1500 Hi Point St 90035 because it will serve to provide 90% market rate/luxury housing and does not meet city housing needs. We need no less than a mandatory 85% of all new housing unit rents to be at affordable income and moderate income rates.

We need all new multifamily apartments to be a mandatory 85% affordable and moderate income rents.

(2/21/21)

The nominating process Los Angeles

"G. Juan Johnson, legal advocate". 2022 Los Angeles mayoral election . Wikipedia.

THE NOMINATING PROCESS. Many of you know the nominating petition process is based on the days when one had to vote along party lines. This no longer applies in local elections. In view of the effects of COVID-19, to save our Republic, I urge you to support either the elimination of the candidate nominating petition process (just the petition, not the nominations) or making the petition nominating process strictly online where voters can nominate their candidates and see a daily internet tally of the results. Please call your local, county, and state election officials and seek the support of your friends and neighbors. Also contact the city Los Angeles elections department and the ethics department. This is NOT a time for large gatherings to get in person signatures. Now is the time because the next nominating petition process starts February 2022 so laws will have to be changed before then.

Click PHOTO to see Facebook campaign page

19FA0F00-EBDD-4344-BF30-F54AC5A2AD38_4_5

We have enough solutions and money. We need better leaders

"However, Garcetti believed that the City Council’s plan was more business as usual and was not a “progressive vision for the future.” ..."confronting the stark Black-White disparity among people experiencing homelessness, driving racial reconciliation, protecting jobs held by people of color with new opportunities in the City workforce, and working in closer collaboration with our communities on allocation decisions....the City Council’s proposal was focused on basic services such as the repair of streets, alleys, and sidewalks; the trimming of trees; the installation of speed bumps and left-hand turn lanes; and many other infrastructure projects that have been crowded out by ever increasing personnel costs." Somehow I feel this is all political posturing after reaching back room deals. I think Garcetti is the main architect of business as usual. I guarantee you that little of that millions of dollars will go towards improving the plight of the homeless (no matter how small their number in perspective), little will go towards racial reconciliation, little will go towards protecting jobs, little will go towards housing for the middle and low income. Remember Garcetti is head of Metro who has already planned  the economic and housing disparity that will continue to erode the neighborhoods. Who the heck is worrying about infrastructure at a time like this with the reported racial disparities in medical care and the collapse of housing and landlord-tenant relations. . Where is the money to fix those things? Will Angelenos wake up to the fact we have enough solutions and we have enough money, we just don't have the right captains at the helm of the ship. Garcetti announced months ago a city civil rights department; I have tried to contact them numerous times with no response; not even the city clerk's office knows where they are. So much for the mayor's claim to racial reconciliation. So much for fiscal accountability. (Posted to City Watch article. 12/28/20 by G. Juan Johnson)