Talking Points, Notes, Slogans & Contacts:
- How the ban on short term rentals causes displacement and neighborhood instability
- How short term rentals are a labor issue
- Retired workers, particularly teachers
- Film industry workers who have to leave on assignment
- How short term rentals are a safety issue
- Removing problematic long term roommates is unaffordable and dangerous for families, elders, women and people with disabilities
- How short term rentals are an affordable housing issue
- Renting out space in one’s home may make it possible for people to stay in their homes
- How blaming home sharing for gentrification is a distraction
- Banning home sharing in one’s primary residence is a means of neighborhood stability not instability
- How home sharing is a consent issue
- People should be able to enter into relationships of their choosing and for the duration they choose.
- How home sharing is a woman’s issue
- How home sharing is a social justice issue
- How home sharing is an economic survival issue
- How home sharing is a community stability issue
- How short term rentals keep tourist dollars in Los Angeles and in communities
- How short term rentals serve the community: employment, small businesses
- How home sharing is a senior issue
- How home sharing is a privacy issue
- How parking is a false issue in relation to short term rentals
- How short term rentals are a disability rights issue
- Why we don’t want to rent more than 30 days
- How short term rentals keep us in our homes, is affordable housing, community stability, anti-gentrification, anti-displacement
- Hosts are banned from any other home based business in homes that are listed as short term rentals under the proposed ordinance.
- If this were just about housing displacement it would never be about home sharing, it would only be about abusive landlords, tenants rights and Ellis evictions
- Deconstruct the opposition to home sharing, the bait and switch, the lack of actual grass roots opposition, the real interests opposing home sharing: The hotel industry, the developers, wealthy home owners in the hills and the beach communities and NGOs whose financing comes from RSO unit and landlord enforcement.
- Why RSOs should not be exempt if they are the primary residence of the host
- Rents under rent control may still be too high
- Landlords who live in one unit may need extra income to cover the cost of the low rent of the other unit, and may want to rent out a room in their primary residence
- Families who live in multiple family units that they own.
- — A way to get into the housing market
- –Ownership the basic affordable housing
Key problematic Areas of the Proposed Ordinance Include:
- Key revenue from occupancy tax can provide important revenue to the city to meet costs of housing, homelessness and other essential services. Limiting home sharing limits the revenue collected
- Existing laws pertaining to Ellis properties, abusive landlords and party houses (in general and specific to short term rentals) may not have been fully enforced or utilized. Concerns regarding parking, noise, and accountability need to be addressed in general, not just as pertaining to home sharing.
- City should focus on protecting tenants from abusive landlords and Ellis evictions in general and in relation to short term rentals.
- The sharing economy provides the city with jobs and stability at no cost to the city.
- Home sharing supports local businesses and brings tourist dollars into communities.
- Neighbors, community businesses, hosts, employees of home sharing, report that home sharing provides significant housing, employment and community stability.
- Many people who home share are seniors, retired teachers, people with chronic health conditions who cannot work outside of their homes and for whom having long term tenants presents a hardship and lack of control over one’s home and environment.
- Limiting the number of days of operation in owner-occupied properties should be no different than for any other home-based business.
- Number of guests should be commensurate with occupancy restrictions for housing in general. There is no reason to have greater restrictions for short term or long term residency.
- Agreements between renters and landlords should not be the enforcement obligation of airbnb, similar platforms, or L.A. city.
- Efforts by residents, either renters or owners to support themselves in their own homes should be encouraged.
- Restrictions on RSO units make it less affordable to both tenants and mom and pop landlords, struggling to meet housing costs.
- Homes where no one was displaced should not be penalized for conversion when that house was the primary residence of the owner prior to home sharing. Many families buy small multi–unit properties for their own use. Home ownership is a form of affordable housing.
- People who work out of their home should be also entitled to home share. Restrictions on non-residential uses should be no different for home sharing than is otherwise allowable. This clause is extremely vague.
- The elimination of Conditional Use Permits for actual Bed and Breakfasts is counterintuitive. If anything, that process should be streamlined and less expensive.
- Creating jobs and small businesses should be encouraged by the city.
- There should be a grandfather clause and consideration of hardship to protect those who have been home sharing in the property of their primary residence.
- Enforcement of the use of private spaces of people’s homes takes away vital resources that would protect tenants from abusive landlords and communities from real nuisances.
- Opens the city up to extensive lawsuits.
- Home sharing provides short term interim housing to people between housing, and those relocating to Los Angeles.
- Home sharing allows people more control over who they live with and for how long.
- This ordinance is a poor substitute for real and comprehensive housing policy.
- Proposed fines for noncompliance within one’s own home are extreme and draconian.
- Enforcement can be handled by the Housing and Community Development (HCID) Department, along with enforcement of all tenant rights issues. All rental units are already registered with HCID as are all Ellis Act Evictions. Increase the HCID budget to allow for greater enforcement of landlord abuses, outreach to tenants about their rights, how to assert them and where to report abuses.
Slogans and Catch-Phrases:
- WRITE THAT ORDINANCE!
- THIS IS NOT THAT ORDINANCE!
- HOSTS (DON’T SAY AIRBNB UNLESS YOU ARE SPECIFICALLY DISCUSSING AIRBNB, NOT HOME SHARING IN GENERAL)
- HOME SHARING IS/CREATES/MAINTAINS AFFORDABLE HOUSING
- ENFORCE EXISTING TENANTS RIGHTS AND NUISANCE LAWS
- ENFORCE ABUSES THROUGH THE HOUSING OFFICE.
- DON’T LEGISLATE INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS IN OUR OWN HOMES
- HOME SHARING IS A HOUSING RIGHTS ISSUE
- HOME SHARING IS A COMMUNITY STABILIZATION ISSUE
- HOME SHARING IS A DISABILITY RIGHTS ISSUE
- HOME SHARING IS A LABOR ISSUE
- I’M UNION, AND I SUPPORT HOME SHARING
- HOME SHARING PROVIDES JOBS, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY STABILITY
- THIS ORDINANCE IS A LAND GRAB BY THE HOTEL INDUSTRY
- THE HOTEL INDUSTRY….
- Use the language of the opposition and don’t assume their narrative
- Commercialized home sharing
- Housing rights
- Labor rights: If you’re a union member, say so, and often
- Keeping housing affordable
Information and Contacts:
Council File Number: Council File Number: 14-1635-S2 Refer to it in any communication with council/staff.
Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee:
Sharon Dickinson, Legislative Assistant, firstname.lastname@example.org
Councilmember Jose Huizar, Chair
Councilmember Gilbert A. Cedillo
Councilmember Marqueece Harris-Dawson
Councilmember Mitchell Englander
Councilmember Curren D. Price
Link to City Council Directory: https://www.lacity.org/your-government/elected-officials/city-council/council-directory