If you have the complaint letter, share it, please.

It might be interesting if the California Government Code prohibits any group (CAA for example) from impersonating a government agency by mis-appropriating the official logo or name of a California Government Agency. All citizens would then "have standing." If you are still standing after those two sentences ...

Our own Gary from Sylvan Park neighborhood, is usually a legal expert on this type of thing - and he is certainly no friend of The "W" Chronicles written by a majority of the council. Maybe he will be 'quick on the Writ' and get this quashed by some post-publication legal action.

and Gary says ....

I received a phone call from someone claiming to represent the Realtors Association, telling me "not to vote for Measure V," because Landlords would not be able to evict violent criminals. When I asked the caller to tell me more about why that was true, she said, "...well, the Realtors Association told us to read this to you..." Lets all be informed voters.

This is socialist-populist class warfare at its worst. Mountain View has made the incredibly horrible decision to become a city of renters and not a city of property owners. By doing so, MV has laid the foundation for the destruction of MV's rental housing stock. Renters don't give a damn about the future of MV. All they want to do is to line their pockets with money stolen from their landlords, the property owners --- with govt-approved mandates. Economists ironically call this self-seeking behavior "rent seeking", no kidding! Rent seeking, get that greedy renters?

I'd like to see MV to implement a policy to tear down all substandard rental units and replace them with owner-occupied condos or townhouses. Maybe the owners will vote more responsibly once they have some skin in the game.

If you don't like this, then I really don't give a damn. I'm economically right, and you're economically ignorant.

@informed Voter, yay, you made my day! I'm so glad to hear that finally the Property Owner side is stepping up and getting more info out regarding this ridiculous rent control ploy. Not only that but I'm gong to try to find out who's leading the cause and see if I can help make phone calls! It's time the truth be told and everyone who has VESTED in our beautiful city know the incredibly negative effects rent control would have.

VOTE NO ON BOTH V & W

Rent control will make MV a new dump of the Bay area. Renters may one day move out of the area to pay a higher premimum for a better place to live.

This is effectively the SAME STORY of six days ago Web Link -- slightly updated. So the same criticism applies as to the earlier version:

The CAA mailers did, in fact, accurately quote from the Legislative Analyst's appraisal of rent-control policies generally. Those points apply *exactly* to Measure V and similar efforts -- which is obvious, if you read the material. They explain why the emperor has no clothes -- information that the Measure-V people don't want folks to see; thus their protests. The Legislative Analyst's Office did, actually, do "an analysis and found rent control to be flawed." (Which "Tony Samara, an organizer with Faith in Action Bay Area" complains about, as if it were somehow untrue. All hail the emperor's new clothes!)

You don't even need the Legislative Analyst's office to tell you those basic realities, if you know anything at all about economics:

Artificially forcing prices of rentals below what the market is willing to pay does, in fact (I've experienced all this, as a RENTER:) increase competition for the increasingly rare vacancies; lead to new, unpredictable criteria by landlords selecting renters; NOT benefit the lower wage earners relentlessly cited as "intended" beneficiaries of Measure V; and lead to an overall decline of the community's housing stock. These are sheer basic market realities, demonstrated for centuries, and they don't go away because someone doesn't like them, or employs variously imaginative rhetoric to try to spin or belittle comments like mine here.

I'm not, and have never been, a landlord. The Measure-V people, ideological blinders firmly in place, don't CARE about the well-known side effects of rent control. Now they cry "foul" when embarassing facts they'd prefer to suppress appear from an authoritative, impartial source. Where is the Voice in all this? Where is the economic common sense? Where are the articles quoting the mom-and-pop landlords? Where's the editorial outreach for Guest Opinions by RENTERS who oppose rent controls because they know the dark side? Several such people have posted Town-Square comments to past articles. It's looking more and more as if those "Yes on V" advertisements in the Voice bought more than just ad space.

I received the mailer paid for by California Apartment Association and "from the nonpartisan California Legislative Analyst's Office". As a person who spent a fair amount of time working in federal government settings, my initial intuitive response was "there's something hoaky about this". A "non-partisan" report would not be sooo partisan. Peculiar and sneaky was my guess and I was right.

This ploy goes to show how desperate the anti-rent control folks are. Their worst nightmare is "what if the people actually see the need for rent-control in MV?" and vote accordingly.

This is dirty politics and should be rewarded with clean votes that reject the ploy. Until this mailer showed up I was on the fence but not now.

Take the high road people and teach these clowns a lesson. Vote for rent-control will do that.

Dirty politics? That is almost laughable except that it is depressing that you actually can still feel that way after EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE AND POST on this is overwhelmingly anti-rent and after overwhelming factual evidence has been presented to proving rent control will NOT be good for either renters or this City.

Dirty pilitics? How about the FACT that this whole initiative was put together behind closed doors? How about the FACT that the MV Voice has not run ONE SINGLE ARTICLE presenting the other side, the side that has factual statistics that prove rent control is not good for either renters or cities? How about the FACT the MV Voice keeps running the SAME OLD ARTICLES with the same old tired arguments for rent control? I'm sure they do this hoping the general public are sheeples who can't be bothered to dig into the details and discern fact.

Thankfully, as evidenced by the overwhelming number of posts and even more importantly, the conversations I've had just with my small group of friends, the general populace understands the negative effects it would have and most plan on voting NO on both measures.

VOTE NO O BOTH V & W
Bu

So how much, exactly, is the landlord lobby paying you for posting the same nonsense, over and over and over again?

Nothing. I'm just a normal lil old homeowner who's made an investment in a home in MV and doesn't want to see this town get ruined by failed ideology.

Since you're wanting to go down the snarky route, just how much are YOU hoping to screw a property owner so you pay less?

I guess you want Mountain View for yourself and people like you.

Newsflash: There are those of us who have lived here a LOT longer than you have, that believe that what is going on right now cannot be sustained. And the fact that you want to push us out is truly disgusting.

Now go back to spamming boards like this

I see the socialists are out, those that have no idea what Capitalism is all about. They think everything shoild be handed to them on a silver platter even though they do nothing to deserve anything.

@@mvresident2003 I know you probably won't believe this but if you are truly a long time resident who can no longer afford to live here, I truly do empathize. No one wants to "push you out". Do you truly think there are people here, clapping their hands , singing and celebrating that "you're being pushed out"? No. I'm sure no one feels that way.

At the same time, is it others responsibility to ensure you can live (stay) where you want to live? Straight up, very simply, should someone else have to pay for YOU to live where you want to live? I have said this multiple times. I LOVE this area, LOVE mountain View, going up to the City, going to Santa Cruz. Walking the Baylands, the Rancho reserve, all our fabulous Art and Wine Festivales, community events.

But I know I will not be able to afford to live here when I retire. It will absolutely break my heart, but I will have to leave, I just can't afford to stay here. Yet I do not expect others to subsidize me, pay for me, to stay here.

I don't want Mountain View for me or people like me. If I can't afford it, I can't afford it, It just is what s it. I truly, honestly, simply don't understand why people feel like they should be able to stay some place that they can't afford. I just don't get it.

With measure V, the rents will be locked in at historical all time highs. According to the anti-rent control zealots, rents are headed downwards anyway So, this ordinance will not affect profitability. Unless, the anti-rent controllers are lying about rents going down? Their position is so bad, they just make up facts.

What this ordinance does and why the landlords are quaking in their boots is something not often discussed. Measure V would allow tenants in buildings with safety and sanitation violations to get help from the board. A recent study by MV city staff showed about 1/2 the buildings were in violation. So, the argument that rent control will cause landlords to stop maintaining their buildings appears to be happening already! With the ordinance in place, the landlords will have an economic incentive to maintain their buildings.

Voting for Measure V is the right thing to do.