Earthquakes are a fact of life in California. So are earthquacks - also known as shaking ducks.

The majority of Mountain View small homes are built of wood and generally do OK in earthquakes although being moved off the foundation is a real risk. However, that doesn't represent a building collapse.

Even if the San Andreas or Hayward Fault were to toss a 7.9 plus quake our way it's much more likely that San Francisco would suffer the real damage with collapse (or tilt / fall) of multiple, excessively tall structures. Much of Mountain View would be OK.

Yes retrofit and raise rents an average even more - say $100 per month. Under MV's rent control law (Measure V), rents already increase every year and are unregulated on turnover. Plus, landlords can apply for still higher rents based on new "costs." $100 per moth would be "peanuts" compared to the doubling of rents that would follow the sneaky repeal of the rent control law in MV. John Inks, Michael Kasperzak and their landlord buddies are still having paid professional circulators seeking the signatures on their repeal measure from unsuspecting voters. There was a table at Costco Friday afternoon.

If this is made mandatory, I am done with the rental business.

This is just the final straw from more local and new state laws that will have higher property costs for my business, which I can not absorb or pass thru to tenants because of the caps an the yearly increases. If this would not be a rent control city, I understand the situation of this, but I will not consider going thru the hops that the rent board will put me thru, nor can I show any lender that I would be applying for a loan to pay for the work as there will be no additional rental income to pay for another loan payment.

There is a new state water law that will allow only 55 gallons of usage per day starting in 2022, then down to 52 1/2 gallons per day in 2025 with fines ranging from $1,000 to $10,000 per day. These older properties do not have separate water meters and there will be no way to catch who is doing the laundry-shower-dishwasher all in the same day as that will exceed the 55 gallon limit per day. Having multiple people living in a unit only means higher costs to the property owner.

Any body who has been watching the rent board and seeing how they are treating a landlord will understand that we are not being treated fairly. Attorneys are being supplied free of cost to the tenant and they are treating this hearing as a court room. Why do they not supply attorneys to landlords for free? There is nothing fair about this rent control.

If the Voice would be fair on this matter and a actual news source, they would be reporting on what the current applicant, David ________, who is going thru the process of asking for a rent adjustment, what all he is required to do and supply to the board. That is news that the community should know about and decide for themselves if that is fair.

My property will go up for sale to the highest price developer.

Hey Landlord. As you know, the costs you are whining about can form the basis for an application for higher rents - if you are not getting enough through automatic increases and unregulated rent levels on turnover. As to selling to a developer, go ahead. But the developer will not pay much without knowing what can be built. And there is no legal right to demolish or build much of anything. So what you need are LANDLORD LACKEYS ON THE CITY COUNCIL AND RENTAL HOUSING BOARD. And you have them -but may lose some control after November's election.

You complain about the other side being not honest, just look in the mirror and see what dishonesty really is.

As I said, it is impossible to get ANY Rental adjustment, increases, thru the application process. They purposefully make it as difficult as possible demanding you produce hundreds of pages of documents, then they have their attorney playing legal games making it all but impossible for a landlord to comply with all the requests. Sure, a landlord could hire an attorney to fight it, but at $600 an hour, even if you where granted a small increase in rent, the attorneys bill would mean that a landlord would be even worse off financial.

Pay attention to what is going on and stop being dishonest about what the actual language is and what the REAL WORD CONSEQUENCES are of Measure V.

This report just validates what many have been saying about these older properties, that they cost more to maintain and that they have lived beyond their livespan.

If the city declares that this is an emergency and mandates that this seismic retrofit happen, then that also means that these older buildings should be given an expedited path for review and approval for a building permit to redevelop the property.

Any attempt by the city to stop redevelopment after they declared them a danger to the community, will be met by many lawsuits against the city.

I think selling your property is the exact right thing to do. Setting regulation to require mandatory retrofit because _your property is unsafe and people will die_ is absolutely correct. If it's no longer economically viable to keep an unsafe building up then tear it down and build new.

Hey "honest" landlord looking to end all rent control: Identify the apartment building or complex that applied for higher rents but got the run-around you have described.

It's going on right now, the applicant,(owner) first name is David and out of respect to that person I am not posting his last name. Several other people have came before the council and expressed the same issue. Go look it up and sit in during the hearing, it is a public hearing-court room.

Again, you are the on being dishonest here. But that is what Measure V is.

A 1906 earthquake in San Francisco would probably kill more people than in 1906. Rebuild.

Under Measure V, rent increase petitions do not go to the "Council." The petitions to increase rents (beyond the Measure V adjustment) are not private. Identify any "honest" landlord that you claim filed any such petition by complex name or address so really honest persons can look it up. Saying you know of some landlord named "David" will not suffice.

@Peet

Apparently you are uninformed of what the process is and what another poster here has been saying.

1- The applicant is David Anvy. The first hearing took place on June 5 or 6th as I remember. The meeting was held at City Hall and the room next to the council chambers. He has, IMHO, a serious issue in regards to not having enough income to pay his mortgage, not that you would care about that as in Measure V it has language in it that states that the payment of interest on a loan is not allowed as a business expense and can not be used in calculating what a fair rate of return is.

2- No poster here wrote anything about bringing an application to petition for a rent increase to the city council. Your lack of reading ability and comprehension automatically makes you go into jacka$$ mode and attack people who only point out the facts, which you do not want the public to know about.

The property and landlord in question is the one that was sued for “triple damages” by the businessman on the timing of roll back refund. Of course that frivolous complaint was dismissed, but it remains a symbol of the Measure V supporters feelings of entitlement to take from others.

This poor guy has to deal with hostile, ungrateful tenants and the unwieldy bureaucracy created by measure V.

He was part of a group that put down 58% cash on a $4.95M 10 unit building. The building is old carrying much deferred maintenance, so he needs adequate cash flow to pay the $2.1M note, finance improvements and have a fair return. The fair return is not likely possible with Measure V. It is pretty darn un-American that someone who reasonably risked $2.9M of cash is punished so severely, it is a bucket of ice water poured over any hope of improving the City’s rental stock.

I see online a 61-year-old sine man in Palo Alto named David Anvy. You say he is part owner of a 10-unit building in Mountain View. Let's look at this as your best example of what you say is wrong with Measure V. Is there an onsite manager? What is the total rent received on the 10 units? How much higher does David contend the rent should be? How much is the monthly mortgage?

Did the landlords do anything to their apartments before rent control was in place no they raised the rent and didn't retrofit so now they want to raise the rent. Sounds like the new fuel tax.