Opinion: West Hollywood Cares About Renters? Then Why Doesn’t Someone Speak Up for Them?

Larry Gross of CES

Where is WeHo’s Larry Gross?

Those of you who have been around a while might recognize the name of the executive director of the Coalition for Economic Survival, the renters’ rights group, who was fundamental to creating the successful campaign in 1984 to incorporate West Hollywood as its own city, a city then committed to making WeHo a safe place for elderly and low-income people as well as those who were gay. In doing so, CES helped residents of the previously unincorporated West Hollywood escape the tyranny of the largely Republican Los Angeles Board of Supervisors that was interested in gutting limits on rent increases.

But that was then. This is now. In today’s West Hollywood, being gay is not only acceptable, it’s quite fashionable and very well accepted. And the city also has in place many programs to help the elderly age in place. But being a middle-aged or young renter is quite a challenge. A February 2018 report on the city’s affordable housing issue notes that almost 80% of West Hollywood residents are renters and 50% of residents are “rent burdened,” meaning they spend more than 30% of their gross income on rent.

That means someone with a salary of $60,000 would spend $1,500 a month on rent (only likely in West Hollywood if you’ve remained in the same rent-stabilized apartment for decades or are splitting the cost with one or more roommates). After deductions for taxes, Social Security and Medicare, that person likely would end up with about $500 a week to pay for car loans, car insurance, food, gas, telephone service, etc. What’s left won’t be enough to pay for that $16 cocktail at The Abbey or that special $160 glass of wine at The Conservatory. Netflix will be a more affordable choice than a movie night at the Arclight. And Trading Post, the used-clothing retailer, will be the go-to place for shirts, skirts, and slacks rather than Fred Segal. Now I understand why one local activist has quietly set up a “couch surfing” service to give young gay men who work in the city (for salaries much less than $60,000 a year) a place to sleep at night (consider it a cheap Airbnb for low-income locals) and why some sleep in their cars.

We can be thankful for the

city’s rent stabilization program, a result of the successful campaign for incorporation, which limits rent increases on 75% of the city’s rental housing units to a small fraction of the annual Consumer Price Index of Greater Los Angeles. That means that if you moved to West Hollywood in 1990 and still are living in the same apartment, your rent is a steal. However, a landlord can raise the rent on your apartment to the market rate if you move out (which gives landlords an incentive to try to make long-term tenants do just that). So in West Hollywood, rent stabilization should be considered largely as a benefit to the elderly, a class of renter that is, by definition, dying out.

It’s also great that we have a requirement that developers of buildings of 11 or more units make 20% of the units affordable to middle-, low- or very-low-income individuals. However, the waiting list for such units is very long and now closed.

And yes, we do meet our Regional Housing Needs Assessment number, an excuse cited by one City Council member and one candidate in a former City Council election to justify their opposition to new development. However West Hollywood meets its RHNA target because that target is very low — the city’s 2013-2021 RHNA target is only 77 housing units for very low-, low-, moderate- and above moderate-income people. Despite setting such a low bar, West Hollywood has already exceeded it by a large margin, with more than 322 inclusionary units built by the end of 2016. That still amounted to only .9 units per one hundred residents.

So what can we do to make housing affordable in a city where rents are climbing like they are in the rest of California? Despite its national reputation as a progressive place, California ranks 49th in the nation in its per capita supply of housing (Utah, ranked No. 50, keeps us from hitting the bottom). It is a state that has opposed Donald Trump’s plans to build a wall on the Mexican border but whose local governments (including ours) effectively have built their own walls to keep the middle-class and poor away.

We can fight for renters rights in West Hollywood, like Larry Gross did back in the day. But so far, there is no one doing that in West Hollywood. Yes, there is the West Hollywood Renters Alliance, which held its first meeting in September 2017 and did speak out against a proposal that renters be required to pay part of the costs incurred by their landlords in retrofitting buildings to protect them from earthquakes. (Condo owners, who showed up in droves to protest, were immediately exempted by the City Council — only two of whose members are renters — and after a complex and lengthy evaluation of plans for having renters share retrofit costs, the Council suddenly ditched that idea as an election was looming).

But the West Hollywood Renters Alliance seems to have disappeared. Now almost all of the residents who speak up on housing and development issues at City Council meetings are homeowners who don’t want more development. Many of them showed up at the meeting at which our City Council voted unanimously to oppose state Sen. Scott Wiener’s Senate Bill 50, which would have knocked down many of the ridiculous barriers to construction of apartment buildings in the state of California. Many of those homeowners who opposed SB 50 never really got their facts straight (no, SB 50 wouldn’t have permitted 85-foot tall buildings in West Hollywood’s single-family zoned neighborhoods). But no one from the WeHo Renters Alliance showed up to talk about SB 50 and contest the “alternative facts” that were presented.

Advocating for renters isn’t an easy job. It requires more than showing up and making a two-minute comment at those twice-monthly City Council meetings. One has to do a deep dive into the city’s existing rent regulations and its zoning laws. One has to understand the basics of economics (yes, new apartments do carry expensive rents, but building more housing than is needed to meet demand eventually will result in lower rents — it’s called Economics 101). Renters advocates need to look at what other really progressive cities are doing (Minneapolis and Seattle have eliminated single-family zoning, a 1950s-era concept that was effective in segregating the white and affluent from other Americans). And they need to read research such as Alisa Belinkoff Katz’s study for the UCLA Luskin Center titled “Unable to Pay the Rent: What History Tells Us About Rent Control in Los Angeles” and listen to Jenny Schuetz, a housing economist and David Rubenstein fellow at the Brookings Institution, as she discusses the complexity of the housing shortage and affordability issues in a podcast by Vox’s The Weeds.

One also needs to attend meetings of the city’s Planning Commission and speak out against the NIMBY’s on the commission and in the audience who effectively slow development in West Hollywood by getting into lengthy arguments over things as silly and inconsequential as the placement of exterior staircases and the color of stucco walls and whether a particular apartment window should be to be able to be raised or swung from the side to open it.

Planning Commissioner John Altschul summed up the issue at a contentious public hearing in 2015 on a project on Ogden Drive. “The city has created a sensational community where people want to come,” Altschul said. “The people that were here, they welcomed us when we came. Let’s not be the kind of people that say ‘We’ve got ours, let’s close the doors’.”

Now who will step forward to make sure we don’t do that?

  1. I agree with all points, except I don’t feel sorry for anyone who doesn’t have money left in his or her budget for a $160 glass of wine. That’s just ridiculous.

    I own property right over the border. All I am seeing are multi family structures torn down, to be replaced by McMansions. Duplexes, torn down so that one rich family can move on my street, or a foreign investor can buy and hold. It’s ridiculous, and it’s adding to the housing crisis.

    I’m not completely up to speed on the housing density laws in the city of Los Angeles, or West Hollywood, but having something that takes up to 78% of its lot’s square footage for one family is ridiculous. Especially when you are displacing two families.

    We need to build, build, build. And most people who oppose that, who are homeowners in the area, are selfish NIMBYs. I do not include myself in that group.

  2. If this City had just elected James Duke Mason like I asked them to, we wouldn’t have these problems. He cares about these issues, but oh, nooooo, we had to re-elect the same “in-the-pockets-of-developers” incumbents we always did. You reap what you vote for. No sympathy. You elect the same old candidates, you’ll get crappy government. Duh.

    1. Since when would James Duke Mason be able to vote five times on any given issue? You need to come up with a better argument.

    2. Councilmember Lauren Meister took ZERO money from developers. Her small and scrappy — yet very successful campaign was funded by the WeHo community!

  3. I must speak as a renter who had been priced out (ellised) out of West Hollywood and Santa Monica two cities founded on rent control and yet are becoming the most gentrified and expensive to live in with exception of Venice and Playa Vista which are becoming synonymous with lack of rent control. Are we suppose to just accept year to year of being priced out or intimidated to leave because “the area commands it”? And landlords can get more money. This is more than American Prosperity, it is All About American Greed and those that have the upper hand are landlords and most would tell us to move out because you can’t afford WEHO anymore so move aside! That is the oppposite of Rent Control that has all but been practically erased because of landlords with that mentality and neither care to ensure low income affordable units or section 8 programs in their properties!

    People also are selfish to have their apartment for 30 years and could care less about younger tenants or with residents dying off wealthier people secure those apartments or middle aged renters who saved a nest egg or who make a salary and might have 2 incomes whether gay or straight that enabled them to live comfortably well before the economy collapsed. Unlike myself who struggles with rent and continuing a section 8 voucher and on the list for 7 years and costs after being here for 8 years and being a low income non-senior I was fortunate to live in a building built in 1957 but loopholes found me to move if repairs were not made section 8/ affordable housing will not allow payment or renew leases.

    We Will Not Just Move Out of This City bevause you said we should HAM. We vane to this city that enforced rent control and low income and section 8 rights we are here to stay just like you and out housing rights shall and will remain in this city have the wealthy move out or home owners or pass a mandate to enforce these programs go no where and stay here forever!

  4. The reason housing is so expensive in California in general, and Weho in particular, is that there is a supply/demand imbalance. Too much demand / too little supply.

    Stimulating new supply by encouraging more development would bring down the equilibrium price and provide renters with cheaper rent, more choice which leads to better quality and better service. This is economics 101. You want more of something? Create economic incentives for new entrants to supply it.

    Regrettably, the Larry Gross’s and other Earth is Flatters of the world reject these axioms, and instead believe that they can out- legislate over economic trueisms.

    So they convince the voters to institute price caps with the tempting allure of free stuff. Who doesn’t love free stuff? Cheap rent for everyone! Guess what? The housing providers that are forced to lose money sell. And the buyers knock down those money losing businesses i.e rent controlled apartment buildings, because nobody wants to invest their life savings into a business that loses money. And nobody builds new ones.

    Can you imagine the owner of the Abbey staying open 16 hours a day, 7 says a week, if the City of West Hollywood put $2 price caps on watered down martinis? Do you think new bars like Rocco’s would spend $2 million in renovations to be able to sell $2 cocktails???

  5. In the real world…..people rent their property’s of cover their expenses…..and hopefully make a small profit. If you can’t afford to live here…..find somewhere where you can.
    Grow up.

  6. Mr Scott makes some good observations, but fails to offer any real world instigator for housing affordability.

    It is true that Larry Gross and others won a successful campaign in favor of rent control. But 30 years later that effort has been diluted to such an extent that it is almost non-existent. This is typical of what happens to rent regulations over the course of 20-30 years. Mr Scott offers no solution (it’s not SB 50) to what must now be done to achieve real sustainable affordability in the rental market.

    It is also true that renters need to speak up so that they get what they want, and what is fair. An individual living in a rent controlled apartment in West Hollywood for 20 years, while owning a luxurious ranch house with a pool in Santa Barbara is not fair. It’s also unfair to demonize single family homeowners or renters. There is nothing obscene or illegitimate about living in, and/or owning a single family home. Many people prefer renting a single family home over owning a condo or renting an apartment. That option should not be eliminated in West Hollywood just because of a San Francisco Senator’s worms-eye view of housing…..or worse.

    I’m all for affordability, count me in, I’m on that train. But if you’re going to talk about hyper building as the solution, you need to start the conversation with what’s the limit? What’s enough? Where does it end?….20,000 people per square mile, 30,000, 50,000 people per square mile?

    One only needs to look at NYC and San Francisco as examples of hyper building and housing affordability…..Nuff said!

  7. Interestingly, on the news, a study found 80% of people who live on a street/neighborhood and 70% who live in apartment housing (the was an all inclusive major greater L. A. Survey) think predominantly single home streets have no Apartments, and Streets of Apartment Buildings, have no single family homes.


  8. Excellent topic for discussion. As a long time renter in West Hollywood, I know what it is like.
    I also know that it is very difficult to get a landlord to make repairs and the code compliance department is not very helpful. It seems to me that landlords collect huge rents, but don’t want to put any money back into the property. It also seems to me that the City has no plans for allowing building low cost housing in West Hollywood. There have been many good ideas floating around like micro-units which are truly affordable. If the 80% of renters would show up at City Council meetings and write letters to the Council and VOTE it might get their attention. I think a great way to get the attention of the City is to have a semi- annual march of renters on SMB ending at either City Hall or a Monday night Council meeting. As a 2019 Council Candidate I ran on being and advocate for renters and as a 2020 Candidate for Council I am doing the same thing. I have a page on my website devoted to renters. There is power in numbers (80%). But if we are afraid to speak truth to power we get trampled on, even as a majority. I am more than happy to work with other renters to organize a Renters Alliance to develop ideas and strategy. The Alliance must never let up on City Hall and City Council to be accountable to renters and low to middle income Residents. Can you imagine what 20,000 Residents marching SMB would be like? Not to mention the friends and supporters from surrounding communities. We must get organized and have the courage to challenge City Leadership to do a better job representing us the renters and voters.

    1. should save your money….and buy a place. people have a right to rent their property at whatever price they choose. welcome to America.

      1. Seniors have been our warriors who fought for the rights which we now Enjoy. We need to make sure they have affordable places to live. I personally rent because of location, there are no homes for sale where I want to live.

    2. As a senior, the thought of living in a micro-unit is horrifying. You seem to put a lot of stock in those. I think only the young would be interested in that type of unit. But if they are built, a lot of seniors would be stuck in them. A way to marginalize, “institutionalizing without institutionalizing” per se.

      1. 50% of West Hollywood are under the age of 40. The ones I talk too don’t need a big place to live. They would love a micro unit. I have a great deal of respect for seniors and have been asking city council for years to keep them in their homes and to build a beautiful senior housing building much like triangle square in Hollywood . SMB and crescent heights is a great place for that

Comments are closed.