••• An Independent round-up of new-ish vintage shops includes one that was new to me: Your Vintage Neighbor on lower Chapala Street (above). The article also says that Westward General isn’t reopening a brick-and-mortar shop here after all.
••• “Stark Differences Emerge at SB City Council Election Forums for Incumbents and Challengers in Districts 1 & 3. […] Perhaps the most consequential matter of the evening concerned rent control, or ‘rent caps’ [….] There currently exists on council a one-vote, 4-to-3, majority against rent caps, which could change based on the results of the election.” (Freakonomics would like a word with anyone who believes rent control is a good idea.) —Newsmakers
••• “Banks across Santa Barbara have experienced a rise in bad checks during the past month, reportedly caused by intercepted mail.” —Noozhawk
••• “The Lucidity Festival, an annual event known for its blend of music and art, has announced the end of its operations [….] The festival has taken place annually since 2012 at the Live Oak Campground off Highway 154. […] However, the festival will now be shutting down for good citing financial constraints that make proceeding impossible, leaving the festival unable to recuperate or refund ticket holders.” —Edhat
••• Goleta’s “City Council is likely to approve reduced speed limits in several areas. If approved, speeds will drop 5 to 10 mph in many of the city’s busiest areas,” including “the majority of Calle Real, Cathedral Oaks, Covington Way, Fairview Avenue, most of Hollister Avenue, Glen Annie Road, Kellogg Avenue, a portion of Los Carneros Road, Patterson Avenue, Stroke Road, and Ward Drive.” —Noozhawk
••• “Platform Holly, the offshore oil platform in the state waters of the Santa Barbara Channel, [has been] completely plugged.” The California State Lands Commission “will now develop an Environmental Impact Report for the platform’s deconstruction, which will be brought before the Commission in early 2025.” —Independent
••• “After eight hearings, the County Planning Commission approved the agricultural enterprise ordinance which will dictate uses for properties wanting to add campgrounds, farm stays, special events and tours. The ordinance still has to go to the Board of Supervisors for final approval.” —Noozhawk
••• “Members of the Santa Barbara Architectural Board of Review gave mostly positive feedback to the developers of a proposed housing project at the site of Tri-County Produce on the Eastside. […] The new plan would allow Tri-County Produce to stay open for most of the duration of the construction.” —Noozhawk
••• “SBCC Asking Voters to Support $198 Million Bond Extension […] The funds from Measure P, an extension of 2008’s Measure V, would be used for facility improvements.” —Noozhawk
••• A long New York magazine profile of Eric Goode—on the occasion of his new TV show, “Chimp Crazy”—mentions that his Ojai compound now totals 100 acres (including the Turtle Conservancy). There’s no mention of the El Roblar hotel project that looks close to opening, though.
••• “Nearly two years after Measure T—a ballot measure that would have stopped the Surfliner Inn proposal in its tracks—failed by 83 votes, plans for the Surfliner Inn will soon be back in the hands of city review boards. The city of Carpinteria determined the project’s application complete earlier this month. The city’s Architectural Review Board [will discuss it] later this fall, with a date to be determined. Story poles will be put on the site at least two weeks before the ARB hearing date.” —Coastal View News
················
Sign up for the Siteline email newsletter and you’ll never miss a post.
As a former renter and now homeowner in SB, I strongly believe SOMETHING needs to be put in place to restrict the increase in rent. We have owned our home for 4 years and our monthly costs have not changed so why would that be any different for someone renting their property? There’s no reason rents need to increase to the same tenants every year. Freakonomics states that rent control deincentivizies new construction. Show me where new affordable (emphasis on affordable) construction has happened in SB without rent control. With our geography new builds are not going to be happening at the rate needed so it’s time that landlords stop the greed.
What happens when a property changes hands, and the new owner’s costs have increased significantly? Any boom in the prices of real estate, as we’ve seen here over the past few years, will end up trickling down to rent prices. The only way to control rent prices in a sustainable way is to allow for more housing development. Rent control has been proven time and time again to negatively impact housing stock, and doesn’t actually result in long term benefits to renters.
Renters are made aware of any changes to property ownership and any increase of costs should be outlined to them explaining why an increase is necessary. But if a property maintains the same ownership, show me where increases in costs come in to play that requires a 6% increase in annual rent to the same renters. Those renters then have less income to spend in the community affecting local businesses etc.
Homeowner insurance polices! Some have gone up more than 30% in one year! With some companies leaving our state altogether.
The regular argument against rent control isn’t that nothing should be done. Alternatively, the best way to help reduce the burden of rent for low-income families is for the government to provide rent vouchers like Section 8 housing. Then the developer needs not create special units that are rent-controlled and the process is entirely between the government and the person receiving assistance. Giving people money has been shown time and again to be the best use of government funds.
Paul – your costs owning a home have not increased in 4 years? I don’t believe that. What about property taxes (up EVERY year). Utilities, parts and labor for maintenance and repair? All are up! What if you have to finance an expense? Interest rates have increased.
Lucas is right. Without even getting into the complicated economics, even the most basic premise of Paul’s argument is incorrect. Any homeowner can tell you their costs tend to go up every year.
While I strongly disagree with you that rent prices are skyrocketing because of “greed,” (I’m not even sure what this means: do we live in a fantasy land where developers and property owners are putting their capital at risk in order to operate a non-profit? Do we not believe in the concept of free markets governing the prices units can command?) I don’t think anyone disagrees that prices are high relative to average incomes and business revenues and have quickly gotten higher. Living in CA is getting harder and driving people into homelessness, vibrant areas into ghost towns full of vacant units, etc etc.
As so many commenters have piled on here, there is pretty much a consensus among economists at this point that rent control hurts everyone, including tenants (particularly tenants). But a huge issue in CA/SB (and lots of places) is that it’s so difficult to develop, build, and for suppliers to live and work here. Supply is highly constrained because of restrictions, not all of them really productive. If we want to talk about bringing prices down and actually achieve something other than just a nice vent session, let’s get out the reading glasses and scrutinize where we can reduce red tape, make some reasonable tradeoffs, and get rid of antiquated or no-longer-relevant building or business restrictions. It is possible to make things easier for business without hurting the environment, the architectural standards, or anything else. But it will take work.
This is not what every property owner I know or have heard of is experiencing! The fact that insurance is going up , if you can even get it, makes headlines! Maintenance costs are astronomical with the going rate for handymen more than doubling, materials have gone up so much that’s another headline maker, utilities up, and plumbing and other work has gone up steeply. I’ve had plumbers tell me I should have done a number of things awhile back because prices have gone up so much. Seriously, are you being serious?
Seriously! I had to FIGHT for a refund after the wonderful SBCounty Tax Assessor rec’d my check that was dated and postmarked well before due date- they actually had the audacity to fight returning my $376 FINE! They haggled with me over not sending envelope, only check with letter to tell me “I had already made payment (with late fee✔️) and to make a note in my ledger- when I asked for the envelope/to PROVE it was dated before due date- they sent a PHOTOCOPY of the front of envelope! Want to know why? On ALL my gov’t dealings I write TRUMP 2024 on the front or back of envelope- someone in their office purposely withheld my property tax and thought I’d just pay the fine. It was a very pleasurable experience to force 2 different people in the Assessors office to apologize for not immediately refunding me, and in turn, to not refund me AT ALL! I had to force them giving me a refund! VIVACALIFAS!
Unless you are living off grid 100%, not paying for any maintenance, not paying property tax or insurance, your costs of homeownership HAVE increased in the past four years.
I would love to see everyone’s housing bills that show their costs have skyrocketed that would result in landlords having to increase rent every year to folks who have stayed in that same apartment/house. On top of the fact that we know they aren’t charging rent based on a zero net profit so there was already a cushion built in when they rented it. If you work with anyone who rents, you’ve probably heard plenty of horror stories of folks having to find a new apartment because the landlords are increasing rent without making any marked improvements to their rentals. Yes, it is greed whether you like that word or not, it’s the truth. Again I’ve owned my home for 4 years and the largest increase has been our HOA fees, all other costs are very slight increases that would warrant a 2% increase on rent at most but I have a feeling those increases are not breaking the bank for the vast majority of landlords who are probably using the specter of “inflation” or “rising costs” or as some of the disgusting comments here have mentioned “illegal immigrants” to raise rents on tenants. The MAGAism of all this is really sick.
Your exact quote: “We have owned our home for 4 years and our monthly costs have not changed so why would that be any different for someone renting their property?” In other words you have changed your story. Most landlords are paying PITI plus utilities. Then there’s maintenance. And the costs related to renter abuse/neglect. Did you mention taxes and the cost of doing business in California? Among other things, I don’t owe you a shred of proof that my insurance premium just increased 40%. I won’t defend the malfeasance of unethical landlords but you have conveniently lumped everything into one bucket without any understanding of what it costs to operate a business, especially in California–and somehow managed to make it about politics.
Hi Paul, there are these things called capital improvements, like replacing your roof or resurfacing your driveway. They’re not capped at cpi or a 2% increase each year. You’ll understand in a decade when you need to reroof and it costs 10% (or more) of what you originally paid for the house.
All of you are forgetting that as a landlord you can deduct ALL your expenses from your profits/rental income. That can amount to a huge savings as compared to other investment income. I do believe there is tremendous greed going on in the rental market and truly, it makes me sick.
Buy a house already!
You deduct total expenses from total income to get your profit. You pay taxes on your profit. Just like every other business. This isn’t the gotcha you think it is.
Haha you are clearly NOT a homeowner if you just posted that your costs have not increased in four years.
Property taxes go up 2% per year and property insurance costs in CA have gone up approximately 30% feet n last 3 years (insurance business magazine ) .
And if you think tour sewer, water and electricity costs haven’t increased you’re not paying attention.
I can’t speak to the rest, but property taxes do not go up every year in California. Limited to about 1% as per Prop 13. (IN 1975!)
Incorrect. 2% increase per year is the cap under Prop. 13, determined by DIR CPI increase.
On one hand you say property taxes don’t go up and on the other you say the limit is 1%. That’s still an increase and, btw, it’s 2%
I am a developer, owner and operator of numerous multifamily properties some of which are in downtown Santa Barbara. The cost alone to build these properties will not be recouped in my lifetime. The insurance cost are out of control with increases from 30% – over 100% (I have one property were the insurance has increased over 200%) This is for standard building insurance and does not include Earthquake which is added on top. The maintenance cost have increased, property, taxes, etc. Rent control will bring an end to development in SB which the city needs to stay alive. All of the Empty commercial space downtown and businesses closing should be an indicator that more money (and people) are needed to keep this great city alive.
Your IG Story says “changes coming to the SYV” and yet there is no mention about changes coming to the SYV once you go to page?
It’s regarding the agricultural enterprise ordinance, which is a hard thing to explain in a few words.
Thanks for reply
Somehow 1000’s of low income, low-skilled, undocumented (not allowed to legally work in the US) people live and thrive in our community. And yet, according to the activists, we are in dire need of low income housing to house all the people making 60-80k a year.
What would happen if all those people who were not supposed to be working here left? Would 1000’s of units become available at “market rate”? Would the market respond with added inventory with lower prices? Would certain businesses suffer due to a lack of cheap, exploitable labor? Would others thrive due to a fair market? Would incomes and wages rise due to the market requiring a higher figure to attract workers? Why yes. Yes they would.
Until reality is discussed, this whole conversation is an exercise in academic discourse. Not in real life and certainly not in practice.
We need to raise the standard of living downtown. Attract higher incomes and high wage professional jobs. Not add more low income housing and tourist focused low wage jobs. Oh, and ENFORCE THE LAWS already. Cheaters are cheaters. Make them pay.
This might be a shock to some of you but people who live in low income housing do not shop at boutiques or eat $100 meals. They barely contribute to the city’s tax base and now the city wants to hit those people with a regressive sales tax increase. The very people who can afford it the least! (Sales taxes hit the lowest income people the hardest).
When you pack the downtown corridor with low income, or worse, Govt housing, you get low income results while removing future value from the tax rolls. Add the tourism industry and you end up with the inevitable… the lowest common denominator.
Good luck finding people to work at boutiques and restaurants that charge $100/meal with your racist, classist plan!
This is racist and weird to say, not to mention demonstrably untrue.
But what the low income workers do, is all the hard work you (and many others!) won’t do. Not to mention help wealthy people get wealthier. So I call BS on that rant. How about paying EVERYONE a living wage and raise the boat for everyone?
Some of y’all maybe shoud read this: https://peoplesaction.org/wp-content/uploads/Economist-Sign-on-Letter_-FHFA-RFI-Response-1.pdf
OK, I read it. Who are these folks? I wonder if they own property themselves? Here’s what can happen, instead of dealing with all the hassels from entitled renters , unexpected repairs and rising costs I can just cash out my investment and remove my single family home from the rental market or turn my multifamily into condos. End of problem for me but fewer units available for renters.