Connect with us

California

Are ‘ballot selfies’ allowed at California voting sites?

Published

on

Are ‘ballot selfies’ allowed at California voting sites?


You’re at your polling place. You’re excited about taking part in the democratic process. You want to document the moment and perhaps share it on social media. Can you take a selfie at your polling place? 

Advertisement

In California, the short answer is, “Yes.” 

But as long as you do not violate any other law. And elections officials and poll workers ultimately have the discretion to prohibit the selfie if they determine the action is causing disruption that requires a response. 

SEE ALSO: Nearly 50% of voters say deepfakes had some influence on election decision: Survey

Advertisement

State elections officials also note that the photos cannot result in the unauthorized sharing of and use of information relating to how a person has voted. 

They also stress that taking photos at the polling place cannot compromise the privacy of other voters casting a ballot. 

Advertisement

In addition, it’s illegal to intimidate other voters or interfere with the elections process or with the duties of elections workers.

So-called “ballot selfies” haven’t always been legal in California, and they’re not legal in all states. 

California’s law changed on Jan. 1, 2017, allowing voters to “voluntarily disclose how he or she voted if that voluntary act does not violate any other law.”  

Advertisement

Prior to that, the Secretary of State’s office historically took the position that the use of cameras and video equipment at polling places was prohibited.

Here’s a look at activities banned at California polling sites:

Advertisement
  • DO NOT ask a person to vote for or against any candidate or ballot measure.
  • DO NOT display a candidate’s name, image, or logo.
  • DO NOT block access to or loiter near any ballot drop boxes.
  • DO NOT provide any material or audible information for or against any candidate or ballot measure near any polling place, vote center, or ballot drop box.
  • DO NOT circulate any petitions, including for initiatives, referenda, recall, or candidate nominations.
  • DO NOT distribute, display, or wear any clothing (hats, shirts, signs, buttons, stickers) that include a candidate’s name, image, logo, and/or support or oppose any candidate or ballot measure.
  • DO NOT display information or speak to a voter about the voter’s eligibility to vote.
  • DO NOT engage in electioneering; photograph or record a voter entering or exiting a polling place; or obstruct ingress, egress, or parking

California is also one of about a dozen states and Washington, D.C. that has a complete ban on guns at polling sites, either open or concealed.

As for what voters should bring when going to cast their ballot, in some, but not most cases, a California voter may be required to show identification, according to the Secretary of State’s office. 

Voters casting their ballot for the first time after mailing in their registration to vote may need to show proof of ID if they did not provide their driver’s license number, California identification number or the last four digits of their social security number on their registration form.

Advertisement

Here’s a list of acceptable forms of voter identification to use at polling places. 

KTVU has compiled a comprehensive California voter guide with key information and election-related dates to help ensure your vote counts.

Advertisement

You can also find a link to our 2024 Election coverage here, where you can find information about candidates as well as state and local ballot measures.  



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

California

Here are the 100 California residents giving the most in the race for the White House

Published

on

Here are the 100 California residents giving the most in the race for the White House


When it comes to presidential fundraising, California is a juggernaut.

The Golden State is home to a large group of uber-wealthy donors with some of the deepest pockets in the nation — money that could help swing the presidential election next week between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump.

Harris would be expected to have a clear fundraising advantage: she’s a California native who served as the state’s junior senator and attorney general. Trump has frequently bashed California and its leaders on a range of issues and in the 2020 presidential campaign lost the state by nearly 20 percentage points.

In 2020, President Joe Biden’s campaign raised more than $145 million from Californians, the most from any state in the nation, campaign finance disclosures filed with the Federal Election Commission showed.

Advertisement

While California is overwhelmingly Democratic, it is a major source of Republican campaign dollars — Trump raised $333 million in the state for his 2016 campaign committee, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Times analyzed federal election data to identify the biggest donors hoping to sway voters in this year’s race. The records reviewed include individual contributions from donors residing in California as of Sept. 30.

Not surprisingly, Harris supporters dominate the list of largest donors, taking up 89 of the top 100 spots. In fact, 48 of the top 50 givers from California all donated to pro-Harris fundraising committees.

Looking at her top 100 donors nationwide, Harris is getting a much larger share of support from big-time California contributors. Those state residents have collectively given more than $53 million — over half of the total $102 million received from her biggest donors.

It’s a completely different picture for those supporting Trump. Only nine of his top 100 donors were from California, giving over $8 million combined, or just 5% of the $161 million haul from his largest givers.

Advertisement

Here’s a closer look at some of the biggest donors in the state.

Megadonors come out strong for Harris

Haim Saban, Chairman/CEO of the Saban Capital Group: $1,852,599

Haim Saban

Haim Saban

(Willy Sanjuan / Willy Sanjuan/invision/ap)

The Israeli American billionaire has been an outspoken supporter of Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas. In October, Saban said Harris was clearly the better choice for the US-Israel relationship and Israel’s safety and security.

Advertisement

“Kamala Harris has a stellar record throughout her career, strengthening this critical alliance,” he wrote in an opinion piece. “Unlike Trump, Harris has demonstrated a lifelong commitment to the American Jewish community and Israel. The choice for Jewish voters and all voters could not be more straightforward.”

The Hollywood media mogul has been a reliable ally for Democrats, hosting a Biden fundraiser at his sprawling Beverly Park estate in February. Tickets to the fundraiser cost up to $250,000 and actor Jane Fonda and comedian Greg Proops were reported to have attended.

Reid Hoffman, venture capitalist at Greylock: $1,682,600

Reid Hoffman

Reid Hoffman

(Getty Images)

Advertisement

The LinkedIn co-founder has also donated $7 million to the Future Forward PAC, a Democratic super PAC. Hoffman drew criticism in July for calling for Harris to oust Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan, who has brought antitrust cases against Big Tech and introduced rules to protect workers.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Hoffman explained his support for Harris and said he believes Trump’s plan for increased tariffs would hurt the economy.

“Tariffs and trade wars are terrible ideas for businesses, terrible for Silicon Valley,” Hoffman said. “I think stability and trying to actually have institutions and the rule of law are more important than a 2% cut in a tax rate.”

Steven Spielberg, filmmaker: $1,429,600

A man with black-framed glasses and gray hair smiles for cameras at a movie premiere

Steven Spielberg

(Charles Sykes / Invision / Associated Press)

Advertisement

The growing unease with Biden’s disastrous debate performance in June led some celebrities to call for him to drop out of the race. Once Harris took the Democratic mantle, Hollywood heavyweights began giving more to the vice president, including Spielberg who gave an additional $500,000 in late September, federal election data shows.

“We are all in for Kamala and have been since the moment she announced,” said Andy Spahn, a Los Angeles political consultant to Spielberg and other media moguls. “Tremendous excitement and energy here around Kamala’s candidacy. We are all in.”

Sean Parker, owner of Parker Media, LLC: $1,389,250

Sean Parker

Sean Parker

(SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Parker is best known as the founder of Napster and first president of Facebook where he made his fortune. The Silicon Valley tech billionaire depicted in the film “The Social Network” is now a venture capital investor and has gotten more into traditional politics over the years.

In 2016, he hosted a fundraiser at his Los Angeles home that netted $1 million in donations for Hillary Clinton.

He used his tech influence to push for the creation of the Opportunity Zone program, an economic development tool that aimed to encourage investment in low-income communities through tax incentives. However, a Times report found it has instead generated billions of dollars’ worth of tax breaks for the wealthy often in pursuit of luxury high-rises, high-end hotels and swank office space.

Seth MacFarlane, founder of Fuzzy Door Productions: $1,023,000

Advertisement
Seth MacFarlane

Seth MacFarlane

(Dan Steinberg / Invision For The Television Academy)

The creator of “Family Guy” and “American Dad!” has been making big donations to Democrats in recent elections. In 2016, he gave more than $716,700 to two political action committees supporting Clinton’s presidential bid.

After MacFarlane contributed $2.5 million to Democrats in 2018, his company, Fuzzy Door Productions, was ranked second in Hollywood giving behind DreamWorks SKG, according to data from OpenSecrets.org, a nonprofit research group tracking money in U.S. politics.

Scooter Braun, founder of SB Projects: $519,600

Advertisement
Scooter Braun

Scooter Braun

(Richard Shotwell / Richard Shotwell/invision/ap)

The former music manager has worked with pop stars including Justin Bieber, Ariana Grande and Taylor Swift. He also famously feuded with Swift over the rights to her master recordings.

After Swift endorsed Harris for president in September, Trump posted “I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT!” on his social media site Truth Social. Braun quickly made his own endorsement on Instagram: “Shake It Off Donald,” he wrote. “Kamala 2024.”

Trump’s biggest boosters

Barbara Grimm-Marshall, former co-owner of Grimmway Farms: $1,256,600

Advertisement
Barbara Grimm-Marshall

Barbara Grimm-Marshall

(Alex Horvath / The Californian)

The Bakersfield resident is the former co-owner of the world’s largest grower of carrots. In 2020, half of all baby carrots consumed in the U.S. were processed by Grimmway Farms, which was later sold. She is the founder and CEO of the Grimm Family Education Foundation, which aims to help students in underserved communities of Kern County.

Grimm-Marshall also donated $350,000 to back Trump in the 2020 election.

Douglas Leone, founder of Sequoia Capital: $1 million

Advertisement

Boasting a net worth of $8 billion, the venture capitalist supported Trump in the 2020 contest but renounced his support after the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, according to a statement issued shortly after: “After last week’s horrific events, President Trump lost many of his supporters, including me,” Leone said. “The actions of the President and other rally speakers were responsible for inciting the rioters.”

But this summer he changed his tune again, endorsing Trump in a post on X.com: “I have become increasingly concerned about the general direction of our country, the state of our broken immigration system, the ballooning deficit, and the foreign policy missteps, among other issues,” he wrote. “Therefore, I am supporting former President Trump in this coming election.”

Leone made the $1-million donation to America PAC, started by former California resident Elon Musk, who has been feverishly campaigning for Trump recently, even appearing with him at rallies in Butler, Pa. and at Madison Square Garden.

Ranked by Forbes as the richest person in the world, Musk has given almost $75 million to America PAC — the super PAC he created this summer. In the past three months, America PAC has spent more than $100 million to support Republican candidates, according to federal election data.

Carl Barney, founder of a for-profit college chain: $924,600

Advertisement

Barney, who operated a group of for-profit colleges for years, is a noted proponent of Ayn Rand’s philosphy of objectivism.

On his website, Barney said he supports Trump because he approaches the job of president “as a businessman, not a politician.”

“Based on his actions in his first term as President, I judge that Donald Trump’s assets far outweigh his liabilities,” he wrote. “I especially like that President Trump wants to work with Elon Musk to reduce spending, regulations, waste, and fraud in the federal government. As Mr. Musk predicts, it will lead to an era of great prosperity. I agree.”

Marc Andreessen, founder of Andreessen Horowitz: $844,600

Venture capitalist and Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen

Marc Andreessen, left, stands next to his longtime business partner, Ben Horowitz.

(Paul Sakuma / Associated Press)

Advertisement

The tech venture capitalist hasn’t been shy about supporting Trump and Republican candidates in general. His venture firm has given $44 million to Fairshake, the leading crypto campaign fund supporting Republican candidates.

Formerly a vocal Democrat, Andreessen has shifted to the right in recent years because of a belief that Trump could help remove regulations that could stifle innovation in artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency. He has criticized investigations by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission into crypto startups and the hurdles crypto businesses face in getting financing from banks.

“This is a brutal assault to a nascent industry that has never happened before,” Andreessen said on “The Ben & Marc Show” podcast, acknowledging that his firm is one of the largest cryptocurrency investors in the world.

Geoffrey Palmer, owner of G.H. Palmer Associates, $819,600

Advertisement
Real estate developer Geoffrey Palmer

Real estate developer Geoffrey Palmer

(Los Angeles Times)

A billionaire real estate developer and prominent donor to Republican causes, Palmer hosted a Trump fundraiser in 2019 at his Beverly Hills mansion, where tickets cost as much as $100,000 per couple, according to an invitation. Palmer also hosted a fundraiser in 2017 for former Vice President Mike Pence at the same mansion.

According to Forbes, Palmer is worth $2 billion. His G.H. Palmer Associates is one of the largest owners of apartments in California, according to commercial real estate firm CoStar. Palmer’s massive L.A. apartment complexes include the Orsini and the Lorenzo.

Deborah Magowan, Retired: $711,600

Advertisement

The wife of the late San Francisco Giants owner Peter Magowan, she donated more than $200,000 to Trump in the 2020 campaign, a Times analysis found. She also gave $100,000 to Republican candidates in the 2022 midterm elections.

Times staff writer Gabrielle LaMarr LeMee contributed to this report.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

Clear weather expected for Halloween in Southern California, rain coming Saturday

Published

on

Clear weather expected for Halloween in Southern California, rain coming Saturday


The first significant rainfall of the season is expected to hit Southern California on Saturday, Nov. 2. This will follow a warm, dry Halloween day.

On Saturday, the National Weather Service expects a low-pressure system to move over Southern California, causing some rain across the area beginning in the afternoon through evening hours.

Meteorologists expect around a quarter of an inch of rain in Los Angeles County. In Orange County and the Inland Empire, more rain is expected in  mountain areas, and meteorologists predict between a quarter of an inch and half an inch in lower elevation areas.

On Sunday, meteorologists expect scattered showers in the morning, but areas should remain dry.

Advertisement

The rainfall wasn’t expected to have a major impact on a possible World Series game Saturday or celebrations over the weekend.

But the NWS said drivers may see some traffic issues as the first big rainfall of the season could cause slick roads.

Earlier in the week, meteorologists expect mostly clear conditions on Halloween, Thursday, Oct. 31.

High temperatures Thursday are expected around the low 70s in the Inland Empire and the inland areas of Orange County, while coastal cities will have a high in the mid-60s. By the time for trick-or-treating, temperatures will fall to the low to mid-60s.

In Downtown L.A., Halloween temperatures are expected to reach a high of 69 with a low of 58. Highs will reach 71 in the San Fernando Valley with lows around 48, and in coastal L.A. cities, highs are predicted around 68 degrees with lows around 52.

Advertisement

Originally Published:



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Rent control battle in California heats up, opposing investors pump money

Published

on

Rent control battle in California heats up, opposing investors pump money


Reyna Aguilar was working as a chef in a restaurant in San Francisco’s Mission neighbourhood when the COVID pandemic struck. The restaurant shut within months, leaving Aguilar worrying about how she would make rent on the studio apartment she had lived in for nearly a decade.

When the government announced it would give rent vouchers, Aguilar, who wears her hair in a loose knot, felt relieved. But her landlord asked for cash instead.

Worried she would lose the home it had taken her a few years to find after she moved to the United States from Mexico to earn money to be able to pay for the education of her five children whom she had left behind, Aquilar contacted Catholic charities for rent vouchers. But the landlord would not accept those either.

Instead, she told Al Jazeera that the landlords’ employees stood in the building hallway, shouting insults and making it hard for her to pass through to her apartment.

Advertisement

At first, she slept with a stick, afraid they would break in and of the rats that scurried around her apartment. When she felt the landlords’ employees looking through the broken keyhole in her apartment door at night, Aguilar stopped sleeping. By November 2021, fear and sleeplessness got to her, and she moved out.

It began a three-year-long journey to find affordable housing in the city. Aguilar started living in her car by the city’s Dolores Park when she couldn’t find another place she could afford to rent. “I didn’t know any laws then, or I would never have left my house, whatever the situation,” Aguilar said.

Later, she learned that once she vacated her apartment, the landlord could charge a new tenant a much higher rent, according to a California law called Costa-Hawkins, which was passed in 1995.  It exempts single family homes, condominiums and post 1995 construction from local rental control laws which would limit the extent and frequency of rent increases. The law also allows landlords to charge higher rent from new tenants when rent-controlled tenants, like Aguilar, vacate the place.

Once Reyna Aguilar moved out of her rent-controlled home, it took her several years to find affordable housing [Courtesy Reyna Aguilar]

The repeal of this act, to allow more expansive rent control, will come up in the November 5 ballot. Those opposed to it, mainly large developers and landlords, have raised more than $124m in the last year until October 28, California’s Secretary of State figures show, to fight this ballot measure. This is more than twice as much as the funds raised by the campaign to continue having rent-controlled housing.

An Al Jazeera analysis of campaign finance records found that much of the $124m was raised by large corporate real estate companies, such as the Blackstone Group, the Essex Property Trust, Equity Residential and Avalon Bay, which have investments from the California Public Employees Retirement System, the California State Teachers Retirement System and the San Francisco city employees’ retirement fund.

Advertisement

This fund flow from real estate companies allowed increased spending on flyers and advertising, skewing the battle for rent control in an election season where polls show that the cost of housing is the second-most important economic concern for voters after inflation.

Both presidential candidates have announced plans to tackle the housing crisis, including building more homes and making home buying easier. Vice President Kamala Harris has said she will bring laws to fight abusive corporate landlords whom she blames for rent increases.

Given that nearly half of all California residents and some other states are renters and often burdened by the costs, the battle over Costa-Hawkins will suggest whether supporting builders to make more homes or helping tenants stay in rent-controlled housing will be more beneficial to the average US resident.

The ballot measure to bring in rent control comes at “a difficult moment in many cities, with many people experiencing homelessness and housing insecurity”, said Mathew Fowle, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Housing Initiative.

This is particularly prevalent in California, “which has more renters than any other state,” said Maria Zamudio, the executive director of the Housing Rights Committee, a tenants’ rights organisation. “And this law leaves them at a razor’s edge,” she added.

Advertisement

Those who defend the law believe that prohibiting rent control will encourage developers to build and maintain more homes. A possible repeal would “hamper the construction of affordable housing, exacerbating California’s housing crisis”, say pamphlets opposing the proposition, dubbed Proposition 33.

The ballot measure also came up in 2018 and 2020 and was defeated. Fundraising by landlords this time has outstripped that on previous occasions when $76m and $95m were raised, respectively. On those occasions, too, the California Apartment Association Issues Committee, which is raising funds to oppose the proposition, outraised those supporting rent control by far, thanks to large real estate groups that get funds from California public employees and teachers’ pension funds.

“This is a very conflicted situation for pension funds,” said Eileen Appelbaum, the co-director at the Washington DC-based think tank Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). While retired public school teachers and employees are likely experiencing high rents, their pension funds are invested in real estate companies that fund the campaign against rent control, she said.

Bankrolling the opposition

Of the $124m raised by the lobby against the ballot measure, more than $88m was raised by a committee funded by the California Apartment Association Issues Committee, according to the California Secretary of State’s website. It got $32m from Essex Property Trust and $22.3m from Equity Residential, two of the largest corporate landlords in the state.

Advertisement

The Blackstone Group, the country’s largest private equity real estate company, gave $1m. It gave another $1.88m through Air Communities, a company it recently acquired. Avalon Bay, another large corporate real estate company, gave $20.135m. Carmel Partners, another private equity real estate company gave $1.48m.

Three other committees together raised $36m to oppose the ballot measure. Large real estate companies also funded some of these.

All of these companies have investments from Calpers, the California Public Employees Retirement System, a review of the Calpers 2023 portfolio showed. They also have investments from CalSTRS, the California State Teachers Retirement System. While the San Francisco Employees Retirement System does not publish its investment portfolio online, press releases said it had recently invested in Blackstone and Carmel Partners.

Spokespeople for Calpers and CalSTRS told Al Jazeera they had nothing to say on the issue. The other organisations did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

In essence, the private equity funds used the pension funds of California public employees, public school teachers, San Francisco municipal employees and state public employees to bankroll the opposition to rent control.

Advertisement

This funding allowed the campaign against the ballot measure to put out flyers against Proposition 33 across the state as well as advertisements claiming that a repeal of Costa-Hawkins would lead to cities setting rent boards that would “dictate what you can charge to rent out your own home”.

Dean Preston, a city supervisor in San Francisco and former tenant rights lawyer, told Al Jazeera that while the campaign against rent control “talks of small landlords, there is a range of landlords. We have seen corporate landlords being much more aggressive in evicting tenants.”

The ballot measure has come at a time when Unlawful Detainers, notices asking tenants to vacate homes within days, doubled, Preston said. More than 2,800 such notices were sent in the fiscal year 2023, up from 1,428 the previous year, according to city data, after a statewide moratorium on evicting residents for non payment of rent during the pandemic period ended. These were expected to rise further in 2024.

“We had set off an alarm to say that the health pandemic should not become a housing crisis,” Preston said in an interview at his San Francisco City Hall office. The city began a large rental assistance programme. “But we did see a wave of evictions.”

Advertisement

Susie Shannon, the policy director for Housing is A Human Right, the group that has sponsored the ballot measure to repeal Costa-Hawkins, told Al Jazeera the group sponsored it again because “wages have been stagnant for a while and rents have been going up. People are struggling. Some are couch surfing and others are homeless.”

Her campaign to support Proposition 33 raised a little more than $50m, funded largely by the Los Angeles-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF). The Foundation works in healthcare worldwide, including selling low-cost drugs, which are sourced through government discounts and sold at its pharmacies. It has also expanded into housing, buying single-room occupancy hotels to rent out to the unhoused. However, the Los Angeles Times has reported that these homes often have faulty plumbing, heating and electricity.

The battle over rent control has led to large landlords and real estate companies backing and funding a proposition requiring AHF to spend its revenues from discounted drug sales on patient care rather than funding rent-control measures. The California Apartment Association Issues Committee gave more than $40m to support this proposition to curb the AHF.

One night, when Aguilar was sleeping in the backseat of her car near Dolores Park, she was awakened by policemen shining flashlights into her face. They searched her car and checked her papers. They left after finding her to be above board and unable to make rent.

After nearly a year of living in her car, Aguilar’s car was towed for illegal parking and she began living on a street by the park. She stayed up all night to keep an eye on her belongings and made sure to stay out of fights and more police trouble. “I was so scared,” she said, recalling those months.

Advertisement

Three months later, in January 2023, she found a shared room in South Francisco’s Daly City. It cost her twice as much as her old apartment had.

Aguilar regretted leaving her apartment in San Francisco City, thinking she should have suffered for a roof over her head.

“Some landlords have made it a business practice of evictions to raise rents,” Preston said about the Costa-Hawkins provision allowing landlords to charge higher rents from new tenants. Aguilar later believed this had led to her being forced out of her house.

The California Apartment Association, which opposes Proposition 33, says in its pamphlets that not allowing rents to rise when a new tenant comes “would dramatically reduce the flexibility to adjust rents between tenancies. Imagine never being able to bring your rents to market rates.”

But tenant activists believe allowing landlords to charge higher rents from new tenants encourages them to push out older ones, such as Aguilar.

Advertisement

“If people are evicted, all they have left is sidewalks and underpasses,” said Carol Fife, a city supervisor in Oakland. Fife had received an Unlawful Detainer notice, threatening to evict her within days for not paying one month’s rent. While she was able to fight against the notice and stay on, not all tenants are able to do so.

Alexander Ferrer, a researcher with Debt Collective, an organisation that created the Tenant Power Toolkit to help tenants fight eviction cases in court, found that such notices were being issued with less than two months rent due, threatening to force many residents out of their homes.

Living under a battery light

It has also meant that tenants cling to rent-controlled homes when they have them, as Aguilar wishes she had.

Valente Casas was out one December night last year when he heard that there had been a fire in the home below his in Oakland. The electrical fire in the double-storied house led to the power and gas going out in both storeys, never to return.

Christian Dominguez in his burnt house soon after the fire. The house has stayed in this condition
Christian Dominguez in his burnt house soon after the fire. The house remains in this condition [Courtesy Christian Dominguez]

Casas works as a cleaner for businesses, but many of the offices he used to clean have shut down as employees work from home, cutting his income and hurting his ability to rent a new home. So, Casas has stayed in his unit, devising an elaborate system to live without power or gas. He has one battery-powered light he charges at work, buys small amounts of groceries every day since the fridge does not work, cooks on a camping stove, accumulates gas cans to light his stove, and watches shows on his mobile phone for as long as the battery holds out.

Then he sits on his bed in the dark until he can fall asleep.

Advertisement

At these times, “I think about what a stressful life this is,” Casas told Al Jazeera. He has lived in the apartment for 15 years. “But if I leave and look for a new place, my rent will go up at least 100 percent.”

Christian Dominguez, who lived in the apartment that caught fire, slept in his car for nearly three months after the fire. With the light of his mobile phone, he walks through the burned unit his family moved into the day he was born, two and half decades ago. The house had a beautiful fireplace, his father had fixed new flooring and cabinets, and Dominguez received his own bedroom. The fire gutted it all.

Dominguez and his father Narciso, who sells hot dogs at the Oakland Coliseum, have rented another place while this one stays ruined, even as Dominguez continues to spend time there. The landlord offered them no help other than to encourage them to move out, Dominguez and Valente said. They believe if they do, the landlord can fix the place and get a new tenant at a higher rent, making the repair worth the money. They have not had any interaction with city inspectors either.

Not far from Dominguez’s and Casas’s home, Marco Cajas’s apartment block also had a fire one January evening. The power did not come back for a month and a half, during which time Cajas showered at a relative’s place and shared meals with them. While power has now returned to his unit, it still is not back in some of the others, which get electricity through a generator parked in the compound. It spews smoke that has made the children sick.

Cajas and other residents have sued their landlord but stayed in the building because they know an affordable new place would be hard to find.

Advertisement
Marco Cajas (left) and his neighbor have sued their landlord after a fire caused a nearly two month long power outage in their apartment building
Marco Cajas (left) and his neighbour have sued their landlord after a fire caused a nearly two-month-long power outage in their apartment building [Courtesy Marco Cajas]

Aguilar, meanwhile, has begun volunteering for tenants’ rights groups, including the South East Tenants Association and Housing Rights Committee, to support tenants such as herself. She visits low-income tenants in San Francisco and helps organise them into unions. She photographs their broken windows, doorbells, faucets with no running water, and elevators that do not work. She sends them to building managers, asking for them to be fixed.

She is also part of a volunteer army that tenants’ rights organisations hope will help reach voters to counter the other sides’ extensive funding in the fight to repeal Costa-Hawkins.

Aguilar thinks it is possible that many people with decision-making power do not know about the Costa-Hawkins rule and how it hurts people. “I wish the authorities knew about Costa-Hawkins,” she said. “It would reduce families having to live on the street. Police treat them so badly, like criminals.”

Fiduciary responsibility

CEPR’s Appelbaum, who has written a book called Private Equity At Work, said there is not much pension funds can say to influence the investments of the private equity funds in which they are invested.

“Pension funds are told they have a fiduciary responsibility to maximise returns for retirees. Doing anything else would hurt that,” she said.

However, in 2018, state law was amended to expand the meaning of fiduciary duty of Calpers, the state’s largest public pension fund, allowing it to “take into account harmful external factors when determining the overall return of an investment”. In other words, pension funds had to keep in mind harmful factors and not just returns.

Advertisement

Jordan Ash, the housing director at the Private Equity Stakeholder Project, said an earlier analysis by the group had found that aside from California’s public employees and teachers’ pension funds, several city utilities’ pension funds – including the Los Angeles Department of Power and Water Employees Pension Fund and San Diego and Santa Barbara county employees retirement systems – have also invested in Blackstone funds that contributed to opposing the repeal of rent control in previous years.

Since then, several cities across the state, including Pasadena, have voted to expand rent control.

Shanti Singh, the legislative director for Tenants Together, a statewide tenants’ rights group, said more cities would look to expand rent control because she believes having volunteers such as Aguilar in communities helps reach out to voters, even without as much money as the opposition.

Aguilar lived in her shared room in Daly City for more than a year, commuting to organise tenants in city apartments and working as a cleaner in a city gym. She struggled to find a place in the city she could afford and still be able to send money to her children, whom she had not seen since she left home 18 years ago. They were children when she left, she said. Now, they have their own children.

“I came here to support my children in their careers,” Aguilar, who almost only speaks Spanish, said. The thought of them had kept her going through her hardest times. “That is what it is to love as a mother.”

Advertisement

Earlier this year, Aguilar had an accident that restricted how much she could work and made the long commute into the city harder. Recently, she moved back to the city but pays more in rent than she earns every month, leaving her in a growing pool of debt as well as the constant worry of being evicted again.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending