A thousand a month for an apartment in Mountain View?
I get that that makes the calculations a bit easier to see, but let's use something close to actual rent for this area. Don't want the "just stop getting avocado toast" NIMBYs any false idea about how much they are destroying this country with their insanely selfish actions.

Pleasantly surprised that RHC and city staff showed common sense, so rare this days...

I am a bit disappointed that this publication did not report on the Appeal in this hearing. The appeal reaffirmed that landlords have an proactive responsibility to maintain units and by failing to do so they are required to provide a rental reduction.

In the case of 21220008, the landlord was ordered to reduce rent by $320.50 because of improper maintenance. It was reaffirmed regarding this appeal.

There is another pending where the building value dropped 45% after management did not do proactive maintenance during the 6 years after purchase in 2016. This is officially the value of the building according to the Santa Clara County Tax Record. Thus the CSFRA does allow for a 45% reduction in rents accordingly.

If one say pays $1600 a month on rent, that should be reduced to $880 a month, retroactively, and for all units in the building in question, which has 4 CSFRA regulated units.

Rent control simply doesn't work. The bureaucratic hoops that the local government and landlords have to go through is laughable. How about, instead, the city encourages / supports development of more units?

I do not see the point of replaying the same argument regarding rent control over and over again. The reality is that the CSFRA was passed by the voter of Mountain View and all attempts to rescind or modify it has failed. The CSFRA provides proper protections from problems with what amounts to material breach of contract.

Everyone understands that if you sign a lease which has a rent based on the value of a building say $2.55M, but in the span of the contract it was changed to $1.45M, a loss of 45% then that contract is in effect invalid.

That would be true regardless of the CSFRA, and in fact it would render all rent payments collected to be unlawful, and could be ordered refunded by the courts. A breach of contract results in consequences no matter what.