Are there any criteria to measure the success of Mountain View interfering with market forces? Or is this just a "feel-good" program to make it seem like the city is doing "something"?

Hey Dan,

You can find information about success criteria and metrics on the city's website.
I'll try to link it here:
Web Link

If that is pruned, you should be able to search for "Informational Materials and Reports" and follow the top result, then re-navigate with the leftnav to the right page (under Outreach and Information).

-Alex

If we want more rentals, why do we make it so hard in MV to become a landlord?

Is the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act designed to make sure rent is fair, or is it to make things better for renters and not for the landlords? I think a fair commission to be 1/2 landlords of all sizes and 1/2 renters, but that is explicitly disallowed in the rules that say no more than 2 people can actually work in the very business we're talking about.

Letting the City Council choose the members of the Rental Property Committee is equivalent to letting the Fox guard the hen house. The Council is pro-rent control and anti-eviction of any renter, no matter how bad a tenant. So they'll choose like minds and let MV rental housing get paralyzed and rot due to lack of upkeep and destructive residents.

Just an Observation,

If landlords do not provide qualified people to be considered for the RHC, that is their problem.

The fact is there is no REQUIREMENT for 2 of the 5 members to be from invested conflict of interest.

Sorry but because of past abuse of the tenants of Mountain View, the CSFRA was passed. And Measure D attempts to remove protections failed by more than a 2 to 1 margin in votes.

Remember any market can be regulated no matter what. And yes property values are crashing and some landlords paid too much to start a business. Thus they are underwater. But since that is an INVESTMENT and NOT a PRIMARY RESIDENCE, they gambled and looks like they got a high card 10 in poker.

Just stop complaining and deal with your business.

David Avny of 184 Centre Street paid $5M to buy a 60+ year old building, he in the 6 years owning it had the building depreciate by 45% and now he is trying to sell it as a legal apartment.

BUT IT IS ILLEGAL AND HE KNOWS IT IN 2015 because it is in a R3.1 residential zone and not a R4. Any certificate of occupancy must comply with land zones to be legal. Here is proof of prior knowledge, before he filed a rental agreement without disclosing the zone nonconformity.

Web Link

And the building is starting to fail because of bad renovating causing structural damage.

So time for the City to be properly protected from out of town landlords that knew what they were doing was illegal.