Town Square

Post a New Topic

East Palo Alto fails to pass rent freeze

Original post made on Jan 4, 2008

The East Palo Alto City Council came up one vote short of imposing a six-month moratorium on apartment rent increases Thursday night.



Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, January 3, 2008, 11:53 PM

Comments (5)

Posted by Jack Robbins, a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jan 4, 2008 at 2:08 am

It's not the rent increases that are the problem. It's the sharp increase that's the problem with a 30 day notice. I think if they raised the rent, $20-50 per year, this problem wouldn't exist. But that's not enough for INVESTORS! They want their money and returns NOW!

I lived here for 5 years without a problem.
In the past 2 months, I've had 5 negative instances with Page Mill Properties.

I always wondered, "That's a strange place to put a Four Seasons. It probably has cheap land and a view from the freeway." But suddenly, it's all makes sense. They're trying to force everyone out! Maybe I'm creating a crazy conspiracy theory here. But it makes even more sense. Palo Alto is encroaching!

INVESTORS OF PAGE MILL PROPERTIES, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF FOR SUPPORTING THIS EVIL GREEDY COMPANY.

I'm all for capitalism, but human heart comes first in my opinion. The spirit of the law comes before the letter of the law. City Council, do you hear that? Scumbag lawyers? The letter of the law would not exist without the SPIRIT of the law!

At the city council, representatives and lawyers for Page Mill told jokes at the podium. I assume they were jokes anyway, all I know is that I was laughing whenever they spoke.

They insulted the people of East Palo Alto by saying how investors were hesitant. They told funny lies about how they were installing energy efficient washing machines, and getting buildings up to code. And making the outside of the buildings look pretty for investors. I'm sure the people that can barely afford to pay rent now thought these were pretty funny jokes. Do they still have amature comedy night at Rudy's in downtown Palo Alto? Who knew lawyers could be so hilarious!

Speaking of people that can barely afford rent, the entire Page Mill team claimed to live at the same address. Check the court reporters logs if you get the chance. Man, times must be rough when a bunch of Ivy Leagers (who definitely looked like the old-money type) have to share an apartment in EPA. No wonder they had to raise the rent.

I understand that renting a home should make a profit. I'm fine with that. Nothing is free. But don't be so blatently greedy about it! Just because you CAN raise the rent, doesn't mean you should or so violently? Who do you people think you are? Oil companies??

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]



Signed: 16% increase


Posted by qq, a resident of Barron Park
on Jan 4, 2008 at 3:30 am

Hmm, these dont't look like the kind of folks that are looking for a 3.2% return on their investment.

Web Link

Their motto states "Investing in commercial and multi family residential properties in growth markets."

3.2% is not growth, heck that isn't even inflation protected.

Perhaps the folks getting pushed out by the rent increase could look at Stockton. The BCC says that their are a lot of inexpensive properties there now.

Web Link

qq


Posted by Roy in EPA, a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jan 4, 2008 at 8:22 am

Page Mill had been doing a great job cleaning up these properties that have been neglected for too long by slumlords. Let them make a decent return on their investment. Lets end the blight in EPA.


Posted by To Roy, a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jan 4, 2008 at 10:33 am

I was open-minded about having a good relationship w/Page Mill Props when they bought our duplexes. But it's been truly bizarre- they have requested things of me they had no legal right to do, they've made ZERO improvements to our places, they send out the wrong workers to our addresses pretty consistently, so their maintenance guys, inspectors, etc. show up at the wrong places and without warning. Messages go unreturned. Letters go ignored. They treat us all like we're stupid people who also don't speak English. When I've made clear to them my tenant rights, they've backed off. But the office employees - wow - it's like amateur hour dealing with them.

For a lot of us, the electrocution of the Page Mill employee right after our illegal rent hike notices was just too much. People are deeply upset - for the loss of one of our residents who was a new employee of Page Mill, as well as the financial hardship these ridiculous rent increases bring. They really haven't done anything to improve places that I've seen. It's a shame.


Posted by Jack Robbins, a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jan 5, 2008 at 2:03 pm

Ok, now that I've cooled off, at least a little bit, I wanted to address some points that were made during the meeting.

It was repeatedly stated by Page Mill Properties that "If you have a problem, contact us." That's a great statement, if it meant anything.
Phone calls do not get returned. Period. If you manage to talk to someone, you talk to an office worker, who has little authority to do anything. I don't blame the office workers on having no authority. I blame Page Mill Properties for making this a point of contact and saying "We'll help you!" with a forked tongue.

They mentioned during the meeting that they've hired security guards to patrol each property every 4 hours. As if that's a benefit to us. It's a benefit to Page Mill Properties because they want to protect THEIR investment. Stop telling us lies that it's for our benefit, when it's just for yours. In fact, you should probably check on those hired guards, because I usually see them sitting parked talking with each other.

EPA is probably the last bastions of low rent in the Bay Area, and even here, it's high. I make a decent amount of money, I'm white and priviledged, I'm somewhat educated. I have a hard time keeping up as it is.
I've been in rough spots a few times before, so I know what it's like to constantly worry where your next meal is going to come from. Technically, I can afford the increase, and I'll be staying. On a personal level, I can afford to see and even welcome some gentrification. I'll admit that. When I got my letter, I considered moving. And I got a great offer in San Jose, but that would mean a lower quality of life for myself at a much lower price. I'd rather pay more and have a higher quality of life.

But where the hell am I going to come up with $2000 extra per year? I can do a lot of better things with my money than throw it away on rent and never see it again. I sure as hell can't afford to buy property in the Bay Area.

On a human empathetic level, I know that a large majority cannot afford this. Where are THEY going to get $2000 when a lot are barely scraping by, or worse, not making it as it is? Can they as for a $2000 per year raise? $2000 after taxes. Yes, rents are below market. That's why they live there!

Someone mentioned moving to Stockton. And yes, there are less expensive places to live on the outskirts of the bay area. There's just one problem with that. Jobs. There's no work to be had in those places. Why go somewhere more affordable, if you can't generate income to afford it?

I don't think the people who are involved with this quite understand what it's like when you have $5 a day to feed your family after bills are paid. I don't think they see it. I know what it's like to have that mentality. "Well, they should get better jobs, it's only a $6 a day increase. You can't afford $6 a day?" No! It adds up. And to live in the Bay Area, it's hard to apply for welfare and assitance when you're alreay getting assistance or you make too much to fall below that line.
The estimated number of units involved is somewhere between 1200 and 1600. 1400 units seems to be the number people agreed upon. But let's break that down even more. That's 1400 units. Not people. What is the average number of people who live in 1 unit? 2, 4, 6? That's how many PEOPLE are affected. Not units. Let's say 3 people per unit on average. That's 4200 PEOPLE that you just gave a lower quality of life.

You just made 4200 people miserable, so that you can become even MORE wealthy. Chances are, the people making money off of this have never even worried about things like paying for food. If you can afford to invest in this, you probably have enough money. How much money do you need in life? Are you so insecure that having $2 million dollars to your name is not enough? $5 million? $30 million? When does it end? You don't need any more money. The people that you're taking from are the ones who need it the most.

No, if the city is doing what it's supposed to be doing and helping to protect the people, and make things more productive, and act within the law, you threaten to sue the city! You threaten them with attempting to do the right thing. Your bank account and bottom line means so much to you that you that you are willing to sue the city and make 4200+ people miserable. Man, that is some desperate and pathetic stuff there. A decent human being wouldn't even bring up litigation in the first place.

I won't bring the death of the employee into this, as I feel it's unrelated. It's tragic, recent, but not related to this issue. Personally, I don't find them at fault for that, but I could see how people would argue that.


I do see a solution to this, since I don't think any grinches are going to grow a heart any time soon. You have money. You have our money. You're making a ton already. Don't say that the rent increases are to cover improvement costs. That's a lie. If you do the math, each building is making a very nice profit without increases. A solution that might help things is, since you have all this money, give back to the city in a measurable way that helps people. Not donating a statue or a park. But real things, that people can use. Like food, money, medical, gasoline and a roof over their heads. That's all they want. By raising rents, and especially so sharply, people don't have time to adjust. They can't get that much money so quickly. You could have made these increases incrimentally, so that people can figure out what to do and how to do it.

Someone could easily say "If you don't like it, move." It's easy to say, but do you know how hard that is financially? First, you have to find a place that is affordable and will accept you. Second, in most places, you have to pay First and Last months rent AND deposit in advance. That's usually 2.5 to 3 months worth of rent money, that these people simply don't have laying around.

Stop looking at the way things SHOULD be, and take a look at the way things really are.

Next time Page Mill Properties decides to speak in public, I recommend bringing less lawyers, and more PR staff. Because the things that were being spoken were outright lies, insults and infuriating that they could be said with a straight face. I don't think they were meant to be insults, and that's just how ignorant of the situation you are. These people aren't stupid. They just don't have a lot of money to be handing out.
All the positive points that Page Mill Properties brought up and tried to say were for the benefit of the people, were ALL benefits to Page Mill Properties instead and their investors.

Security - To protect the investments
Energy saving appliances - Saves the building money.
Earthquake retrofitting and replacing rotten wood - AKA, bringing the buildings up to legal code.
New paint, plants and aesthetic improvements - To attract investors.

This is not what the people need. The city of EPA and it's council members are not the boardroom investors you're used to dealing with. You can't sell them like that. We live in different worlds.

But the end reality is, what the people of East Palo Alto need most is LOW COST. That's it. Say it with me. LOW COST. Next time you speak in public, remember that. See, I'm not completely bashing you, I'm helping you. Hire a PR representative that has lived in poverty or near poverty to come up with things for you to say. Just incase you forgot those words again, LOW COST.

This is something you might not understand, so I'll spell out why low cost is so important. No one wants crime. No one wants to live in a filthy neighborhood. No one wants any of these negative things. But, they're willing to put up with these things for: LOW COST OF LIVING. That's something you might not understand. And that's what these people need most, and you took THAT away! Think about it. If you want to sell the people on your goal, show them a low cost solution. Have your marketing people come up with that.

Those "improvements" you spoke about do not improve the lives of the tenants. They sound more like things you tell yourself so that you can sleep better at night. "I'm helping the community!" BS. You're destroying it and replacing it with your own.

A decent human being knows that people come before money. It could have been different. It could have been so very different. But the greed is just so transparent, it overshadows your own human dignity.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Veggie Grill coming soon to Mountain View's San Antonio Center
By Elena Kadvany | 15 comments | 2,926 views

Allowing Unauthorized Immigrants to Learn and Earn Legally Will Help the Economy
By Steve Levy | 38 comments | 2,608 views

Is HBO's Silicon Valley Any Good?
By Anita Felicelli | 18 comments | 1,901 views

College applications: round three
By Sally Torbey | 25 comments | 1,889 views

PAUSD Leadership Challenges
By Paul Losch | 19 comments | 1,443 views