Politics at play as planners debate rental housing program

Lolita Harper

The Planning Commission decided Monday to postpone any action on a

rental housing program for six months to allow city officials to

gather more data, but not before making it painfully obvious that

substandard housing has become more than a sore spot for the city.

It’s a testy issue for politicians, too.

The rawness of the debate became clear as city planners presented

various aspects of the city’s substandard housing problems and

explained to planning commissioners and the public the various steps

to implement a comprehensive program in the city.

For several months, the Planning Commission had been working with

planners and city building officials to develop a rental housing

improvement program, with the effort largely led by Planning

Commissioner Chairwoman and City Council candidate Katrina Foley.

Then, last month, Councilman Gary Monahan, who is up for

reelection, took the reigns on the housing issue at the council level

and quickly and easily promoted his own program, which he says

cancels any need for more rental regulation.

To add more fuel to the fire, a local apartment association,

Rental Housing Independent, sponsored a phone poll to tell

traditionally conservative voters that Foley is a registered Democrat

and an attorney.

The poll seemingly jumped the gun, as Monday night marked the

public unveiling of the commission’s ideas for a housing program.

Representatives from Rental Housing Independent said they were

resistant to aspects of the program that they had caught wind of,

including a fee-based portion they argue would create unnecessary

costs for responsible apartment owners.

The poll was done on behalf of Monahan and Planning Commissioner

Bill Perkins, who is also running for a seat on the dais. Perkins is

also a member of the group that is promoting a rental housing

program, but his name was not included in the phone poll.

Monahan and Perkins insist they did not commission the survey, but

were the unwilling recipients of the data. Both listed the results as

an in-kind campaign contribution on state campaign finance filing

forms. Monahan also listed a $5,000 cash contribution from Rental

Housing Independent.

At Monday’s meeting, these campaign issues hovered in the

background of a debate that moved from tedious to tense.

Using Monahan’s council directive as a starting point, Rick Brown,

the city’s building department head, outlined how he would begin his

aggressive housing enforcement in the Westside area bordered by

Harbor Boulevard, Victoria and Placentia avenues and 19th Street.

In response, planning commissioners outlined data they would like

to see collected during the “pilot program,” such as tenant and

property owner’s response, the affect of redirecting officers away

from other code violations and if Brown would recommend expansion of

the program or added resources.

Discussion of the thorny subject fueled more than a few heated

exchanges between commissioners and a vocal audience that demanded to

be heard.

Foley and Perkins made no effort to hide their disdain and took

jabs at each other until the bitter end. When it came down to a vote,

just shortly before midnight, Perkins said he would not support any

continuance of discussions because he did not support a fee-based

program. He tried to expound but was interrupted.

“We are not discussing a fee,” Foley said. “The motion has nothing

to do with a fee. [We are asking for] a six-month status report to

give us an update on the pilot program.”

Angry property owners objected from their seats and asked why they

were not given a chance to speak out. Officials said the night’s

presentation was officially considered a report, not a public

hearing, and therefore did not include a public comment portion.

Audience members continued to challenge the commission, demanding

to know specifics and insisting their opinions be noted before any

action was taken on the matter.

Commissioners said they were unable to secure any details for a

specific program because the council had thrown them for a loop when

it recently approved its own rental housing strategy -- which called

for a minor wording change in city codes that places eliminating

unhealthy living conditions as the No. 1 goal of the building

department.

“There is no program that is being proposed tonight other than

what the City Council has directed staff to do,” Foley said.

Veteran Commissioner Walter Davenport jumped into the fray, saying

commissioners had a “midcourse change of direction” because of the

council’s recent action. He apologized to audience members who had

waited until past 11 p.m. to hear the presentation.

“The rumor mill has been working overtime and there is a lot of

misinformation out there,” Planning Commissioner Eleanor Egan

eloquently summarized. “Our intention was to work on a proposal, get

input and then have something that was worth while to send to the

council for approval. What happened was that the council apparently

sent a message, so we are stopping deliberations and will wait to

see.”

* LOLITA HARPER covers Costa Mesa. She may be reached at (949)

574-4275 or by e-mail at lolita.harper@latimes.com.