State of Affairs – Eviction Laws & Where We Are Headed, Presented by Brennan Law Firm

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog, Webinar

WHEN: 11:00 A.M. – 12:00 P.M. on Tuesday, October 27th, 2020

MIKE BRENNAN, ESQ. LIVE!Join us online for a live webinar and Q&A session with Mike Brennan, the top landlord and eviction attorney. 


Learn about when and how you can evict your problem tenants, how the newly passed state eviction “stop-gap” law impacts YOU, legal strategies you can deploy for when the emergency declaration has ended and understand your rights as a rental property owner. 


Apartment Owners’ Guide to the 2020 Election

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association PAC has endorsed these candidates for the November 3, 2020, Statewide General Election:

Southern California Districts
Vince Fong
Assembly District 34
Tom Lackey
Assembly District 36
Charles W. Cole
Assembly District 37
Suzette Martinez Valladares
Lucie Lapointe Volotzky
(Dual Endorsement)
Assembly District 38
Ricardo Benitez
Assembly District 39
Andrew Kotyuk
Assembly District 42
Jeffi Girgenti
Assembly District 45
Burton Brink
Assembly District 49
Toni Holle
Assembly District 52
Phillip Chen
Assembly District 55
Chris Raahauge
Assembly District 60
Ali Mazarei
Assembly District 61
Kelly Seyarto
Assembly District 67
Steven Choi
Assembly District 68
Randy Voepel
Assembly District 71
Janet Nguyen
Assembly District 72
Laurie Davies
Assembly District 73
Melanie Burkholder
Assembly District 76
June Yang Cutter
Assembly District 77

Southern California Districts
Scott Wilk
Senate District 21
Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh
Senate District 23
Houman Salem
Senate District 27
Ling Ling Chang
Senate District 29
John Moorlach
Senate District 37
Linda Blankenship
Senate District 39

Tamika Hamilton
U.S. Congressional District 3
Tom McClintock
U.S. Congressional District 4
Chris Bish
U.S. Congressional District 6
Buzz Patterson
U.S. Congressional District 7
Jay Obernolte
U.S. Congressional District 8
Ted Howze
U.S. Congressional District 10
Alison Hayden
U.S. Congressional District 15
David G. Valadao
U.S. Congressional District 21
Devin G. Nunes
U.S. Congressional District 22
Kevin McCarthy
U.S. Congressional District 23
Andy Caldwell
U.S. Congressional District 24
Ronda Baldwin-Kennedy
U.S. Congressional District 26
Johnny J. Nalbandian
U.S. Congressional District 27
Eric Early
U.S. Congressional District 28
Agnes Gibboney
U.S. Congressional District 31
Mike Cargile
U.S. Congressional District 35
Young Kim
U.S. Congressional District 39
Greg Raths
U.S. Congressional District 45
John Briscoe
U.S. Congressional District 47
Michelle Steel
U.S. Congressional District 48
Brian Maryott
U.S. Congressional District 49
Darrell Issa
U.S. Congressional District 50

Ballot Measures

Statewide Measures

No on 14
Why we’re against it
In 2004, voters approved $3 billion for a publicly funded stem-cell agency, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, to support research into new treatments and possible cures. The money has been spent, and the backers of Proposition 14 want voters to approve $5.5 billion more. But CIRM has been widely criticized for inefficiency and insider dealing. Moreover, the federal government and private enterprise are now funding stem-cell research. Proposition 14 fails to address issues of accountability and oversight in the spending of previously approved public funds. These new bonds will cost taxpayers $2.3 billion just in interest payments, drawing $260 million out of the budget every year for three decades. Proposition 14 is not necessary and it’s especially unwise at this time, when there are so many demands on taxpayers. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 14.

No on 15
Why we’re against it
This is the treacherous “split roll” property tax, a direct attack on Proposition 13. Proposition 15 would repeal part of Prop. 13 and require reassessment to market value of business properties. It would raise taxes on supermarkets, shopping malls, office buildings, factories, movie theaters, hotels, restaurants, sports stadiums, warehouses, self-storage facilities, major retailers and other businesses where Californians work or shop. Even the smallest businesses that lease space will face higher rents, or will have to pay the higher property taxes as part of their “triple net” lease agreement. Those higher costs are passed on to consumers. Proposition 15 would raise prices, increase the cost of living and put countless jobs at risk as companies cut back or leave the state. The proponents of this measure are seeking to weaken Proposition 13, and we can guess why. They could come after homeowners next. Protect Prop. 13. VOTE NO on PROPOSITION 15.

More Information    Download Flyer

No on 18
Why we’re against it
Proposition 18 would change the voting age in California to allow 17-year-olds to vote in primaries and special elections if they will turn 18 by the date of the next general election. While some states allow this, California is different than other states because under Prop. 13 and Prop. 218, tax increases must go on the ballot for voter approval. These proposed tax increases are frequently on primary and special election ballots. Proposition 18 would allow high school students to vote on tax increases. This is unwise. The voting age in California should not be changed. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 18.

No on 19
Why we’re against it
Proposition 19 takes away important taxpayer protections that have been enshrined in the State Constitution since 1986. That’s when 76% of voters approved Proposition 58 to allow parents to transfer a home and limited other property to their children without an increase in property taxes. Proposition 19 eliminates Proposition 58 and a similar measure, Proposition 193, which gives the same protection to transfers between grandparents and grandchildren if the children’s parents are deceased. Proposition 19 would require property transferred within families to be reassessed to market value as of the date of transfer, resulting in a huge property tax increase for long-held family homes. The only exception is if the children move into the home within a year and make it their principal residence. This is a billion-dollar tax increase on California families. Proposition 19 contains other provisions, which HJTA has supported in the past, to expand the opportunities for older homeowners to transfer the base-year value of their home (under Prop. 13) to a replacement home. This was on the ballot in November 2018 as Proposition 5, but voters rejected it. Now, with a massive tax increase added, the price is too high. HJTA opposes this measure. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 19.

More Information    Download Flyer

No on 21
Why we’re against it
Proposition 21 would change state law to allow radical rent control laws to be passed in cities that are already suffering from an inadequate supply of housing. In 2016, California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office issued a report that found that expanding rent control “likely would discourage new construction” by limiting the profitability of new rental housing. Under current law—the 1995 Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act—housing providers have the right to raise the rent on a vacant unit to market value after a tenant moves out. The same law also bans rent control on units constructed after February 1995 and on single-family homes and condos. Proposition 21 would repeal this law and allow unelected rent boards (or elected rent boards) to impose radical rent control and regulations, even on single-family homes. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 21.

Yes on 22
Why we’re for it
In 2019, the Legislature passed, and the governor signed Assembly Bill 5, a law aimed at destroying the “gig economy” and forcing companies to stop using independent contractors as part of their business. Supporters said companies must put all workers on the regular payroll as employees, with control over their hours and wages. The Legislature carved out exceptions for many industries, but the ride-share and restaurant delivery industry wasn’t granted an exception. Proposition 22 was put on the ballot by Uber, Lyft and DoorDash. It would create an exemption from AB 5 for the companies’ drivers, while providing them with basic benefits and protections. Without this exemption, the companies would likely stop offering their services in California, depriving state residents of convenient and affordable transportation and delivery services. VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 22.

No on 24
Why we’re against it
In 2018, the Legislature passed, and the governor signed the California Consumer Privacy Act, which gave state residents more rights and control over how their data is shared when they go online. The CCPA took effect this year, and businesses have worked to learn the new legal requirements and comply with them. Proposition 24 is a new privacy law to replace the CCPA. It changes the rules before we even know if they’re working well. Worse, it creates a new state agency to write and enforce regulations that have the effect of new laws, but that no elected official will vote on. This new agency will cost taxpayers $10 million a year, but it will cost California businesses far more. Companies will be effectively forced to hire lawyers to review every technological change or upgrade in order to show the new agency that they are in compliance. This will be a great advantage to the largest companies, because many small start-up companies will not be able to afford the legal bills to file the compliance documents, or the cost of defending themselves from complaints, even meritless complaints. The regulatory burden will strangle technological innovation in California and protect tech giants while hurting small businesses. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 24.

No on 25
Why we’re against it
Proposition 25 is a referendum on a state law, Senate Bill 10, that eliminated cash bail and replaced it with a system based on judging risk, specifically the risk that an arrested person poses to public safety and the risk that the person will fail to show up for a court appearance. Because opponents of the law qualified a referendum, SB 10 did not take effect. A “yes” vote is in favor of the law going into effect; a “no” vote means you do not want the law to take effect. Proposition 25 would result in immense new costs to counties. The new system of risk-based release instead of cash bail would cost taxpayers somewhere in the mid-hundreds of millions of dollars, according to the Legislative Analyst. It’s not clear where this money will come from. This is a huge new cost at a time when counties are already struggling to meet their financial obligations. VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 25.

Local Measures

Los Angeles Unified School District
No on Measure RR
Why we’re against it
Measure RR is a massive increase in debt for LAUSD, $7 billion in borrowed money (bonds) for school construction. It will add new charges to property tax bills, and there is no exemption for seniors or low-income families. Measure RR will cost the owner of a home assessed at $500,000 an estimated $108 per year, adding up to more than $3,800 by the time these bonds are paid off. In addition, Measure RR would authorize the district to seek a waiver of its debt limit so it can borrow more than the law allows. The borrowed money from Measure RR can only be used for buildings, not for instruction. Since 1997, LAUSD has spent $26 billion on school construction projects, yet they’re still promising to remove asbestos and lead paint. Why haven’t they fixed this yet? LAUSD wastes your money and then wants to raise your taxes. VOTE NO ON MEASURE RR.

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association (HJTA) is the largest taxpayers association in California with a membership of over 200,000. Founded by the late Howard Jarvis, the author of Proposition 13, HJTA’s name is synonymous with tax relief and the uncompromising defense of the California property owner.

To learn more at about the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and how your vote impacts the upcoming election, visit

The Promises and Pitfalls of Collecting Rent

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog, Webinar

WHEN: 11:00 A.M. – 12:00 P.M. on Thursday, November 5th, 2020

STILL FUMBLING AROUND DEPOSITING RENT CHECKS?  Learn Everything YOU Need to Know About Online Payment Solutions

Advances in online solutions have greatly benefited landlords and property managers looking to enhance their rental management business to provide better services to their tenants, clients, and vendors.  One of the best practices a landlord or property manager can adopt for their rental business involves collecting rent online.  There are multiple benefits to providing your renters with the ability to make a rent payment online. By collecting rent online, you provide a convenient solution to renters wanting to avoid writing a check, increase the likelihood of on-time rent payments, limit the number of late fees charged to tenants, and simplify your rent collection duties each month.  YOU can have all of this for FREE.

Prediction For 2030: Can We Stop The Government Take Over Of Rental Housing?

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog

Prediction For 2030: Can We Stop The Government Take Over Of Rental Housing?

(This is Part 3 and the Final Article in a Series)

By Roger Valdez

After years of working on housing policy, I have found myself frequently referring to Virgil’s Aeneid, the story of the journey of Aeneas from Troy to Italy where he would be the founder of Rome. Like many epics – the Pentateuch, the Mahabharata, or Gilgamesh – the plot is riveting, but so are the images that become cultural touchstones. The Trojan Horse is one of these. Barbara Tuchman dedicated an entire chapter of her book, March of Folly, to the horse as an emblem of humanity’s addiction “to pursuing policy contrary to self-interest.” The government takeover of housing would be just such a policy. But how do we stop the wheeling of this Trojan Horse into the center of our economy?

I’m not going to argue against the notion that housing should be de-commodified and controlled by the state other than to say that even in such a world, without an absolute, stable, and perpetual equilibrium between supply of housing units and demand for them, high prices would simply be replaced with rationing and long waits for “free” housing. This seems to be enough. Except that, as I’ve pointed out before, the desire to seize private housing isn’t about housing at all, but political power.

Union Backed Prop. 15 Will Destroy Small Businesses

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog

Union Backed Prop. 15 Will Destroy Small Businesses

By Edward Ring
September 9, 2020

California’s state and local governments, and the public sector unions that exercise nearly absolute control over the politicians who supposedly oversee them, have always had an insatiable desire for higher taxes. The economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has added even more urgency to their insatiable quest for more money from taxpayers, but through the years their basic game plan and goals have been remarkably consistent.

For example, the so-called “Split Roll” property tax increase which has finally made it onto the November 2020 state ballot in the form of Prop. 15, is something that has been proposed for years by California’s government unions and their supporters. This new tax is designed to undermine the historic 1978 Prop. 13, which limits property reassessments to when there is a change in ownership, and from that baseline keeps increases to maximum of two percent per year. Prop. 13 also freezes the property tax rate at one percent, although countless local “fees” have elevated the actual amount owners have to pay.

ELECTION 2020: What Can YOU Expect as an Investor?

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog, Webinar

WHEN: 11:00 A.M. – 12:00 P.M. on Tuesday, October 20th, 2020

PLEASE JOIN US FOR A VERY IMPORTANT webinar about the state of today’s real estate and securities markets, and how YOU could be impacted by the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic.  Learn what you can do today to protect your interests as we continue to navigate the current political and economic environments, and the ongoing impacts of the global pandemic.  During this highly informative webinar, we will cover:

  • Choosing investment and diversification strategies that drive favorable returns.
  • What YOU can expect in the face of the Presidential Election and continued, prolonged pandemic.
  • What is driving today’s stock market and real estate market in a seemingly DOWN economy and global pandemic?
  • What do YOU need to know about YOUR investments looking out over a one-year to five-year horizon?
  • Should YOU invest NOW, or hold onto cash or other liquid securities?
  • Stock Market vs. Real Estate Market?  What’s YOUR best option?
  • And, much, much more!  The Q&A following the presentation allows YOU to drive the ongoing discussion.

GUEST SPEAKER: Matthew Wollmann, Vice President, Financial Advisor, HilltopSecurities

Matthew Wollmann is a Vice President, Financial Advisor with HilltopSecurities’ Private Client Group in Sherman Oaks. He has worked as a Financial Advisor since 2008 and specializes in customizing financial and retirement plans for individuals and corporations. Prior to joining HilltopSecurities Matthew spent five years at Morgan Stanley.  Matthew dedicates his success as a Financial Advisor to his belief in approaching the  financial planning process with honesty, integrity, and making his clients’ well-being his ultimate priority. He recognizes the planning process can often be overwhelming and intimidating with the amount of information, often conflicting, regarding how one should begin the process and how to invest. Matthew simplifies the process by designing a holistic financial plan designed to provide clients clarity and peace of mind throughout retirement.

Through the planning process, he gains an in-depth understanding of the client’s financial and personal goals followed by the construction of a financial plan that may include the following topics: Estate Planning, Retirement, Social Security, College-Savings, Asset Management, Insurance, Long-Term Care, and/or Tax-Managed investing.  Matthew is a graduate of Florida State University. He lives in Santa Monica, California with his wife, Jennifer. Together they enjoy spending time with their daughter, traveling abroad, taking cooking classes, wine tasting, hiking, and volunteering at the Los Angeles Food Bank.

GUEST SPEAKER: Mehernosh Engineer, Vice President, Capital Market Strategy, Fidelity Investments

Mehernosh Engineer is a Vice President of the Capital Markets Strategy Group (CMSG) at Fidelity Institutional Asset Management (FIAM), Fidelity Investments’ distribution and client service organization dedicated to meeting the needs of consultants and institutional investors, such as defined benefit and defined contribution plans, endowments, and financial advisors.  Prior to joining Fidelity in 2014, Mr. Engineer worked as a senior macro credit and portfolio strategist at BNP Paribas. Previously, he held a research and portfolio advisory role at Morgan Stanley, working with institutional clients across Europe.

Mr. Engineer earned his bachelor of technology degree in metallurgical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology in Bombay, his master of science degree in materials science and engineering from the University of Delaware, and his master of science degree in financial engineering from the University of Michigan.


Liberty and Justice for All Landlords: Fight Back With the Pacific Legal Foundation

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog, Webinar

WHEN: 11:00 A.M. – 12:00 P.M. on Thursday, October 15th, 2020

Have you ever asked this question following the constant onslaught of government overreach and regulation hurting the value of YOUR rental properties?  CAN WE FILE A LAWSUIT TO PROTECT OUR PROPERTY RIGHTS?  The right to own and use YOUR property is the guardian of every other right. Without it, YOUR freedom to exercise every other right is limited.

The Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) is a nonprofit legal organization that defends Americans’ liberties when threatened by government overreach and abuse. PLF sues the government when it violates Americans’ constitutional rights—and it often wins!  Each year, PLF represents hundreds of Americans and many landlords, free of charge, who seek to improve their lives but are stymied by government. PLF gives them their day in court to vindicate their rights and set a lasting precedent to protect everyone else.

The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution allows government to take private property for public use, but ONLY when it pays just compensation. This is sometimes referred to as eminent domain, condemnation, or a “taking.” Government often evades this obligation by using regulations to limit use of property and reduce its value such a rent control, just-cause eviction rules, eviction moratoria, etc.

Learn what is taking place in a courtroom near you to protect your Constitutional Rights.  Join us for a very important and informative briefing by PLF on current cases and recent case law that will affect your investment in income property.  During this important webinar, we will cover:

  • Current ongoing lawsuits and recent case law that will impact YOUR investment in investment property.
  • Have the local and state, and now Federal eviction moratoriums gone too far?
  • How can limits on constitutional takings be enforced?  What is a “taking”?
  • How can we stop governments that use fines and outright forfeitures to take control of property and pad their budgets?
  • What can be done to prevent government taking property directly by seeking to diminish an owner’s control, effectively turning private property into a public asset while maintaining the fiction of private ownership?

What is being done to challenge Land use laws under the disguise of promoting health and safety, and reducing public nuisances?

GUEST SPEAKER: James Burling, Esq., Vice President of Legal Affairs, Pacific Legal Foundation

Before becoming an attorney, James had been a productive member of society working as an exploration geologist in the late 1970s throughout the southwestern United States. However, after several years of dealing with irrational government bureaucrats and environmental policies untethered from reality, James decided that what the world needs is more lawyers — if they are willing to fight for rationality in regulatory regimes, property rights, and liberty.  James attended the University of Arizona College of Law in Tucson, where he served as an editor for the Law Review and received a J.D. degree in 1983. He had previously received a master’s degree in geological sciences from Brown University and an undergraduate degree from Hamilton College in New York. James received the Professional Achievement Award from the University of Arizona Alumni Association in 2018.

James has worked with Pacific Legal Foundation since 1983, litigating cases from Alaska to Florida. He is a member of the Federalist Society’s Environmental Law and Property Rights Practice Group’s Executive Committee, a member of the American College of Real Estate Lawyers, and an honorary member of Owners Counsel of America, an organization comprised of eminent domain attorneys who represent property owners. The Owners Counsel awarded James its Crystal Eagle award in 2013.  In 2001, James successfully argued a major property rights case, Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, before the United States Supreme Court, a case which affirmed that rights in regulated property do not disappear when land is bought and sold. He has written extensively on all aspects of property rights and environmental law and frequently speaks on these subjects throughout the nation.

Pacific Legal Foundation is a national nonprofit legal organization that defends Americans threatened by government overreach and abuse. Since our founding in 1973, we challenge the government when it violates individual liberty and constitutional rights. With active cases in 39 states plus Washington, D.C., PLF represents clients in state and federal courts, with 12 victories out of 14 cases 


A Property Manager’s Thoughts on Prop. 21

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog

A Property Manager’s Thoughts on Prop. 21
by David Crown

Proposition 21, which would overhaul Costa-Hawkins by allowing cities and counties to impose rent control on properties built within the past fifteen years (among other things), will only do harm if passed.

Landlords won’t have incentive to improve properties when they can’t increase their return. Many won’t even be financially able to repair or upgrade units that don’t bring in market rates. That will affect the quality of rentals available. Landlords that have the ability to use their properties for something else besides residential use may do so, leading to fewer housing options for the people this measure is supposed to help. Enforced caps on rent growth make it difficult for multifamily property owners to meet investors’ target returns. This all adds up to a decrease in supply of new apartments, and higher prices. For example, between 1978 and 1990, Berkeley, California, which has some of the strictest rent-control laws in the country, saw its rental supply drop 14%.

Apartment News Publications partners with Livable

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog

Apartment News Publications partners with Livable:
Now readers can recover up to 90% of utility costs through Ratio Utility Billing

San Francisco and Huntington Beach, Ca. October 1, 2020 – Livable, the leading residential and commercial real estate Utility Billing Platform, announces a new partnership with Apartment News Publications, Inc. promoting responsible tenant utility consumption to the publication’s 135,000+ readers.

Livable’s platform employs a Ratio Utility Billing System (RUBS) that divides utility costs such as waste, sewage, water, gas and electricity among a building’s tenants in an equitable manner based on factors such as occupancy and square footage.

“We are proud to partner with Livable as the choice Utility Management Platform for our readers,” says Travis Watson, Director of Operations at Apartment News Publications, Inc.

Package Theft and Neighborhood Safety – A Discussion With the Los Angeles Police Department and City Attorneys’ Office

Written by Apartment Management Magazine on . Posted in Blog, Webinar

WHEN: 11:00 A.M. – 12:00 P.M. on Tuesday, October 13th, 2020

Package theft has become a growing problem affecting homeowners and renters throughout the Los Angeles Area. Almost daily, millions of dollars of packages delivered by FedEx, UPS and USPS are being stolen at people’s front doors.

Package theft, or so-called “Porch Piracy,” occurs when thieves take packages that are not shipped to them before its true recipient can pick it up from their porch or building. The problem is often underreported to the police since major online retailers often return or refund items with no questions asked if the item is stolen. While the severity of the crime in the United States is usually only minor in comparison to other crimes, it is growing rapidly and many lawmakers have begun to push for punishments of increased severity due to the increase of such crimes.  It has been estimated that the rate of package theft in the United States has been steadily increasing, with nearly 100,000 packages disappearing daily in Los Angeles alone and across the country, more than 1.7 million packages being stolen or gone missing daily, resulting in up to $25 Million in lost goods and services.

During this important webinar, we will cover:

  • Package theft severity and what YOU need to do to protect yourself and YOUR property.
  • What to look out for and how to best maintain safety in YOUR neighborhood and at YOUR property.
  • Package theft and other theft prevention techniques.
  • Maintaining safety for YOUR tenants and neighborhoods.
  • Activating and educating YOUR tenants to keep watch and help ensure the safety of others.
  • And, of course, much, much more!  Q&A to Follow…