November 2022 Election Results

The November general election results are in. Though final counts of ballots are continuing to be finalized throughout the region, numerous Association-endorsed candidates and ballot measures already have their fates sealed. Los Angeles County (including incorporated cities noted in this article) indicated they plan to certify results by December 5th. Listed below are numerous local elections and ballot measures outcomes.

Election Results – Candidates

The following candidates have been elected:

Los Angeles (Mayoral)

• Karen Bass 

Los Angeles (City Council)

• District 5 - Katy Young Yaroslavsky 
• District 11 - AAGLA endorsed candidate Traci Park
• District 13 - Longtime City Council member Mitch O’Farrell lost his seat to Hugo Soto-Martinez
• District 15 – AAGLA endorsed candidate Tim McOsker 

Los Angeles (County)

• District 3 - Lindsey Horvath 

Long Beach (Mayoral)

• Rex Richardson 

Long Beach (City Council)

• District 3 - Kristina Duggan 
• District 5 - Megan Kerr 
• District 9 – AAGLA endorsed candidate Joni Ricks-Oddie 

Culver City (City Council)

• There were two open seats which were won by Dan O’Brien and Freddy Puza. Incumbent Alex Fisch lost his seat.

West Hollywood (City Council)

• There were three open seats which were won by incumbent Lauren Meister, former Councilmember John Heilman, and newcomer Chelsea Byers.

Burbank (City Council)

• There were three open seats which were won by newcomers Nikki Perez, Tamala Takahashi, and Zizette Mullins. Incumbent Sharon Springer lost her seat.

We congratulate all of the Association-endorsed candidates who were elected!

Election Results – Ballot Measures

During the November 2022 General Election, there were numerous concerning rent control and tax related local ballot measures that were put before local voters in the cities of Los Angeles, Santa Monica and Pasadena. Unfortunately, despite the Association’s strong opposition efforts, these measures were approved by a majority of local voters.

Los Angeles

• Measure ULA

Measure ULA, also referred to by its proponents as the “Mansion Tax”, was approved by voters in the City of Los Angeles. The measure establishes a 4% tax on sales or transfers of real property exceeding $5 million, and a 5.5% tax on properties of $10 million or more in order to fund affordable housing and homelessness programs. For example, if an owner is selling a $10 million property, they will now be responsible for an additional $550,000 in real estate transfer taxes. 

The Association strongly opposed Measure ULA. With an already overtaxed constituency, this measure is yet another unnecessary tax burden that will only discourage development and negatively impact renters, property owners and consumers in the City of Los Angeles. This is especially true at a time when the city is already unable to encourage the creation of necessary housing units to meet demand.

• Measure SP

Fortunately, through major efforts made by the Association and its coalition, Measure SP was defeated.  Measure SP which was sold as a proposal to improve city parks, called the “Parks and Recreational Facilities Parcel Tax” would have imposed an additional property tax assessment equal to 8.4-cents per square foot of property.

Santa Monica

Rent Control Measures

• Measure RC
• Measure EM

Measure RC and Measure EM have both been approved by voters in the City of Santa Monica.

Measure RC amends the City Charter to, among other things: (i) require that tenancy terminations for owner/owner-relative move-in, that the owner or qualified relative intend to reside in the unit for at least 2 years as their primary residency unless extenuating circumstances exist and that the owner/owner’s-relative move-in to the unit within 60 days of vacancy, and (ii) reduce the city’s General Adjustment (allowable rent increase) from 6% to 0.8% from February 1, 2023, through August 31, 2023, or average not to exceed 3% with a 3% maximum Annual General Adjustment.

Measure EM amends the City Charter granting the Rent Control Board the authority to disallow or modify annual general adjustments during a declared state of emergency by federal, state, or local government. The City’s Rent Control Board now has unilateral authority to suspend or reduce allowable rent increases during any declared state of emergency.

Both of these voter-approved measures were opposed by our Association, and they further highlight Santa Monica’s disregard for the financial wellbeing of the rental housing provider by shifting even more costs onto them without consideration of their ability to viably operate, especially during a time of high inflation.

Real Estate Tax

• Measure GS

Measure GS has also been approved by voters in the City of Santa Monica. This measure creates a third-tier transfer tax rate of $56.00 per $1,000 in property value transferred for transfers of $8 million or more. Specifically, the tax is an increase from $6 per $1,000 of home value to $56 per $1,000 of home value. As an example, for an $10,000,000 property sale, the tax increase will drastically be increased from $60,000 to $560,000. This is an increase of 833%!

Santa Monica now has the honor of having the highest Real Estate Transfer Tax in the State of California for property sales between $8 million to $25 million.

Pasadena

• Measure H – Local Rent Control

Measure H, also known as “The Pasadena Fair and Equitable Housing Charter Amendment,” was narrowly approved by in the City of Pasadena. The measure imposes strict rent increase limitations capping annual rent increases to 75% of the Consumer Price Index as well as just cause eviction regulations. On top of these new severe local regulations, the measure also creates a Rental Housing Board, a new bureaucracy that operates independent of City Council.

The Association mobilized with a coalition that strongly campaigned against this measure and highlighted the immense cost of the program on the City which has an estimated upfront cost of $5.8 million, the creation of a Rental Housing Board consisting of unelected officials that will have unchecked power and the extreme negative consequences the measure overall will have on the Pasadena rental housing industry.

We encourage our members with properties in any of the above cities referenced to review the full details of these approved ballot measures. Also, we encourage you to become involved and help by contributing to the future opposition of harmful proposals such as these. Give to the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles Issues PAC at www.AAGLA.org/IssuesPAC.

This article is for informational purposes only. If you have any questions regarding impacts on your property and the requirements of any local law changes described herein, please consult with an attorney.