Market-rate housing is no anchor - In defense of rent control

I'm sure Robert Kronovet is a good guy. But based on his recent letter to my esteemed editor (printed Jan. 12), I will probably have to advocate for his defeat in the next election. Not because he’s a Republican (though that doesn’t help his case), but because he’s dangerously out of touch with the needs of renters in our fair city. This wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t for the fact that he’s one of the commissioners of our Rent Control Board — for now.

In his letter, Mr. Kronovet says that he "must take issue with [the] point of view" of City Councilman Kevin McKeown, as if that point of view somehow offended Kronovet’s conscience and compelled him to write a response. What did Councilman McKeown say that was so egregious? In a letter printed on Jan. 2 he wrote, "2009 is our year to get more serious about preserving existing, occupied, affordable housing in Santa Monica. In tough times, we can work together to make sure more of our neighbors don’t suffer eviction. Let’s make sure the new Land Use and Circulation Element, likely to be adopted this year, includes meaningful protection for the stable, long-term Santa Monica renters who depend on existing apartments."

For the record, that’s "preserving existing, occupied, affordable housing" for "stable, long-term Santa Monica renters" in what are undeniably "tough times." It’s the kind of public policy no-brainer that could really only be opposed by landlords, developers, and real estate investors. Mr. Kronovet is all three, so it’s no surprise this common sense approach to land use is so problematic for him. What bothers me is that his views now hold sway on the board, making him the proverbial fox in our beachside henhouse. Kronovet writes, "When Mr. McKeown proposes we reduce new market-rate housing he is destroying the motivation of moving Americans from the rental market into home ownership. I have heard Mr. McKeown frame arguments, he is articulate, knowledgeable and purposeful, but his position opposes that of our free market society. His views of home ownership and private property rights are destructive and hurt our residents."

Again, I’m sure Mr. Kronovet is a good enough guy. If he’s looking for something that "hurt(s) our residents," he need look no further than the block after block being used to store thousands of new cars that won’t ever sell; or the hundreds of thousands of square feet of prime Santa Monica real estate that sits fallow most of the year so it can be transformed into pumpkin patches and Christmas tree lots in the fall and winter. Mr. Kronovet wants us to believe he hasn’t picked up a newspaper since September when our economy began to collapse from the weight of bad mortgages written by semi-scrupulous lenders under the guise of promoting "home ownership," securitized and bundled so investors could realize a profit in "our free market society." Or he wants us to believe he doesn’t know that despite the infusion of hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into the banking industry, lenders have basically stopped lending, making credit inaccessible, home ownership impossible, and forcing most people to continue renting. Mr. Kronovet thinks reducing the incentive for developers to tear down existing apartments so they can be replaced with large luxury condos "cripples tenants from moving up in our society." He says below market units are "an anchor around many of our resident’s necks," and he claims tenants in these apartments "enjoy reduced rent at a cost of their self-esteem and their pursuit of the American dream." That’s the Republican in him talking, and it’s that person I’m probably going to have to do my best to see defeated. It shouldn’t be too hard. He only won by 62 votes.

I have lived in four of America’s greatest cities. From L.A. to San Francisco to New York to Boston (the best of the bunch), I’ve rested my head in a three-bedroom floorthrough in the Mission, a studio in Brooklyn Heights, a five-bedroom loft in TriBeCa, and a one-bedroom in the South End — all rental units. Currently, I live in Mid-City where I share a nice two-bedroom. It’s a little pricey since it went to market rate, but it’s about what we’d be paying in a desirable neighborhood in any of those other places, so I’m not complaining.

Our upstairs neighbor is a nurse who walks a few short blocks to work every day, shops at the Arizona Farmers’Market on the weekends, is the very embodiment of our community, and the reason why rent control and common sense land use exists. I can assure Mr. Kronovet that despite the fact that she’s been renting for 36 years, her self-esteem is undamaged. And knowing what she pays for her two-bedroom with patio and parking, she is most certainly living the dream.