Archive for the ‘Page Mill Properties’ Category
Page Mill’s “Targeted Evictions” Target Tenant Activists
Posted by admin in Page Mill Properties, Pension Fund Mismanagement, tenant harassment on June 18th, 2009
On June 2nd, Page Mill mailed a series of “Ellis Act” eviction notices that appear to be aimed at tenants who have questioned Page Mill’s policies. The Ellis Act is a state-wide law that allows landlords (even if they are under rent stabilization) to evict tenants if the owner takes a series of actions that change the property deed so as to forbid renting the property for a period of ten years. The Ellis Act is meant to be a bitter pill for landlords who really want to live in their property instead of renting it out to someone else. But the law has been misused for other purposes. Quite often, in San Francisco, landlords give notice, telling tenants they must move out, only to have the landlord fail to follow through in placing the restrictions on the property. These instances are called “bogus Ellis Act evictions” should really be illegal, and are a truly low ploy for a landlord to engage in.
Did somebody say low ploy, hmm….is it time to add it to the Page Mill playbook? Oh, right, who are we dealing with here….back to the story….
The Ellis Act eviction notices that went out earlier this month seemed largely aimed tenants who have articulated their concerns about Page Mill’s wrongdoings–they involve four properties–1909 Cooley, 1911 Cooley, 1643 Woodland, and 901 Cooley, all in East Palo Alto. Indeed, we can verify that many of the tenants who have received notice of Page Mill’s putative plans to top renting and move in to East Palo Alto were almost simultaneously being harassed for lengthy depositions by Page Mill’s attorney on topics wide and sundry—all in relation to a suit that one of Page Mill’s shadow LLCs had filed not against them, but against the City (!?!)
( We’ll have more to report on that, but just so you know, Page Mill includes as one of the fringe benefits of the Woodland Park Community the chance for people who are victims of their scheme the privilege of being grilled by their lawyer for hours at a time about your opinion about the law. It’s a really ugly process, and a misuse of the legal system. The good news is that word on the street is that Page Mill has now lost that lawsuit–the 1643 Woodland lawsuit, for those trying to keep track–and has thus closed the door on one of their many avenues for harassing tenants. If your next thought is that the new Ellis notices are merely a chance to discover a new angle for harassment, well, you are probably not wrong. We don’t believe however that Page Mill will prevail; eventually the law will see through these lies, as tenants already do.)
Ah, all the law we must learn to defend our right to the “peaceful enjoyment of one’s home.” That reminds us that, as Independence Day is coming up soon, you might wish to exercise your civil rights and contact your local and state representatives.
We encourage you to contact your local representative to amend the Ellis Act to disallow bogus and fraudulent noticing, and encourage anyone who is even contemplating purchasing property in East Palo Alto to make sure you aren’t buying something that Page Mill has put under the Ellis Act but failed to inform buyers. You don’t want to be victim of a fraud.
While you are contacting your state representatives about the abuse of the Ellis Act, consider giving a call to your federal representative to look into a statement made by Mr. Shore of Page Mill concerning these Ellis Act evictions. In a recent Mercury News article, Mr. Shore said that Page Mill would be evicting rental tenants under rent stabilization in order to participate in a federal program designed, reportedly, to create housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income home buyers.
We really hope this isn’t true. Tell your representative that it would be scandalous for a large landlord, whose money is coming from a state agency, to use a state law to evict tenants out of low income housing so that they might receive federal dollars for “creating” low income housing. No federal program should take low-income rental housing off the market in order to turn the same apartments into low-income mortgages. Anna Eshoo, in particular, should be contacted on this matter: the property not only falls in her district, but she has apparently told members of the East Palo Alto Fair Rent Coalition that the crisis in East Palo Alto is “not a federal issue.” Given that Ms. Eshoo’s ex-husband reportedly has (and thus she once had?) land holdings in East Palo Alto, we don’t find that particularly honest or probing. Call her office at (650) 323-2984.
Tell your representatives that Page Mill has created nothing,and they certainly deserve no federal dollars for their predatory equity scheme.
Where were the sprinklers at 1779 Woodland?
Posted by admin in Page Mill Properties on May 29th, 2009
Just a bit ago, Page Mill issued a press release touting their magnanimity in housing families after a fire broke out at 1779 Woodland Avenue. While we salute Page Mill in rehousing tenants into some of their many unoccupied units, a few red flags did go up about the fire that are worth bringing up. Fortunately, no one was hurt this time, but fire prevention is an ongoing task.
The central question is expressed in our title: why didn’t the sprinklers go off in the unit at 1779 Woodland? Well, the answer is simple in that there are no sprinklers at 1779 Woodland; but it is also not so simple because one has to ask why there are no sprinklers at 1779 Woodland.
East Palo Alto Building Code 18.16.630 et seq. state that a building of this size should have sprinklers. If the building were built this year, the builder would be required to have them. Of course 1779 Woodland is older than that, and we assume that it was built prior to the code standard.
But if you have been following Page Mill’s multiple lawsuits and shoddy applications to the city to try to claim that these have been “substantially rehabilitated” and therefore exempt from the Rent Stabilization laws in East Palo Alto, you probably know that there has been a lot of skepticism about Page Mill’s claims. Many residents have reported that Page Mill has mostly put up coats of paint, exterior fencing, and landscaping, and not done much to actually improve the places where residents live. Even their “disaster preparation” services seem to be euphamistic rather than real. So you may not be surprised by the lack of sprinklers.
But cynicism and denial of responsibility do not constitute an excuse for misbehavior. It is important to note that Page Mill, which just sued the city by insisting that the City scrupulously follow all of the rules and regulations of the Rent Stabilization Ordinance, does not seem to be all that interested in reading these rules and regulations if they can profit from ignoring them. In the case of substantial rehabilitation claims, Page Mill would seem to be required, in order to meet the standard for exemption, that they have spent more than 50% of the purchase price for these units. Included in the many units for which they filed paperwork for “substantial rehabilitation” was 1779 Woodland.
The City denied Page Mill’s application for rehabilitation, not just because Page Mill utterly failed to follow the proper application procedure, but also because their qualifying expenses didn’t really add up to the level they were claiming, and Page Mill’s attorneys refused to show how the work was different than general maintenance or ordinary operating expenses.
But if we acknowledge that Page Mill must show that they’ve spent 50% of the purchase price to remove the property from rent stabilization, one has to wonder why they did they fail in the process of such substantial work to put in a sprinkler system that would protect the property and save lives?
And If we conjecture for a moment that Page Mill really did spend 50% of the purchase price and somehow didn’t put in sprinkler system, one has to ask where their Emeregency Preparedness, Code Enforcement, and Legal Advisors are. Because anybody who actually took the trouble to read the City code would find in section 8.16.570 that “every person altering a building which will increase the size or value of the building by 50% or more shall comply with the requirements of this code”.
We frankly are going to guess that 1779 Woodland has not been brought up to code in many regards. But shouldn’t “substantial rehabilitation” involve compliance with all housing codes. In Section 8 of the EPA code, it is clear that Sprinkers are part of the code. As we mention above, Section 8.16.630 that requires any building with more that 2500 square feet to have a fire detection and sprinkler system.
This is very problematic and disturbing. It would seem that either Page Mill is making false claims about the rehabilitation projects in East Palo Alto, or they are completely negligent in bringing the buildings up to code if they indeed are spending the amount required for substantial rehabilitation. Which is it?
We would be happy to hear Page Mill’s side of this story, and hope that they are appreciative to us for bringing this potential liability to their attention. We look forward to a day when Page Mill reads the law with an intention of following it. It would seem that doing so would bring them into alignment with the Principles of Responsible Investment that their major backer and business partner, CalPERS has sworn to uphold. Where is CalPERS in all this?
We encourage everyone to express their concerns to the Fire Prevention Section of the Menlo Park Fire Prevention District at 650 688 8425 or to the Chief of Menlo Park Fire Prevention District and to the East Palo Alto’s Code Enforcement Division at 650-853-3189 . Also, please consider addressing your concerns to the CalPERs Investment Committee, whose address is P.O. Box 942713, Sacramento, CA 94229-2713.
Page Mill has already caused the death of one worker through their neglect of safety standards. Shouldn’t they follow the law when it comes to fire prevention, instead of issuing press releases after the fire has already broken out?
Page Mill found in violation of Rent Stabilization Ordinance (Again)
Posted by admin in Page Mill Properties, tenant harassment on May 19th, 2009
Reports from several residents has confirmed that an administrative judge has declared Page Mill in the wrong in their attempt to raise rents on over a hundred residents who filed petitions in the fall of 2008. This is not only the second time that the land speculator Page Mill has been found in violation of the ordinance: it also represents a clear statement that how abjectly Woodland Park Apartments / Page Mill has ignored the law and refused to listen to plain reason. Undoubtedly, Page Mill will appeal the case and try to drag out returning the overcharged rent. We suspect that their legal team cackles while savoring slogans like “Justice delayed for our tenants is justice denied.” We’ll have more to report on the hearing examiners’ decision soon, but for now it seems like perhaps justice will not be denied indefinitely. We salute the Stanford Legal Clinic and the hundreds of EPA residents who took the time to stand up for their rights against a big bully. More soon!
Page Mill Fact Check #1
Posted by admin in Page Mill Properties, Pension Fund Mismanagement, tenant harassment on May 15th, 2009
This is the first in a series of posts we will do about Page Mill’s ugly relation to the truth.
In a recent Mercury News article, Page Mill spokesperson Jim Shore finally admitted that Page Mill has evicted hundreds of people in East Palo Alto. This is progress toward the unhappy truth.
Two weeks ago, Page Mill’s hired Public Relations “fixer,” Sam Singer, said in a prepared statement that Page Mill had only evicted twenty residents, and that “The data that is being provided by a local tenants group is simply false.” Anyone who has actually been to the neighborhood knows this is false, and certainly Page Mill knew it was an outright falsehood. When the fair rent coalition then published the actual San Mateo case numbers for the unlawful detainers filed by Page Mill, our favorite pension fund raiders were trapped in their own smokescreen.
Without apologizing for the insult of senseless lying and insult (or acknowledging that they had been irrefutably exposed in their lies), the refuted Mr. Shore simply tried to change the subject, arguing that though those previously denied evictions had indeed happened, but that such numbers were completely normal number, given the tenants that they had.
Okay, so for those of you keeping score at home, I think the score right now is Page Mill 0, the Truth 2.
Now, let it be said that some of Mr. Shore’s claims are really not verifiable and simply bizarre. Take for example his refusal to talk about vacancy rates in the East Palo Properties, on the grounds that such information is “proprietary.” Hmm. That’s interesting. According to a scientifically conducted sample survey conducted by the fair rent coalition, Page Mill has achieved a vacancy rate of approximately 25% in their units in East Palo Alto—a rate that is about eight times the historic 3% vacancy rate of these apartments. So when the Mercury News wanted Page Mill to comment on how they have reached this glorious achievement of being eight times worse at retaining tenants than their predecessors, Mr. Shore claimed such business information is a secret? Isn’t that kind of like the teenager who trashes his parents house during the weekend and then replies, “Sorry, Dad, I can’t tell how it happened because that the story constitutes privileged information”? Okay, so now we are at Page Mill 0, The Truth 2, The Bizarre 1.
But then the reporter, Jessica Bernstein-Wax, obviously asked Page Mill about the disproportionate rate at which they evict people in East Palo Alto. Contacting an equivalently large landlord in Redwood City, and asking for a point of comparison between Page Mill’s 100 evictions per 1800 units, we learn:
Shirleen McDougal, president of Whitley Property Management in Redwood City, said her company manages about 1,100 units in the area and files about one unlawful detainer a year. Eviction rates of about 1 or 2 percent are fairly common in the area, said Len Moore, of San Carlos-based Vilmont Investment Properties.
This is good journalism, not content to let Page Mill put down another smokescreen. Let’s see, Page Mill has approximately a 10% eviction rate over eighteen months, and other landlords are reporting about 1-2% a year, but with numbers as low as 1 in 1100 (about 1/10th of percent). And Page Mill claims that their eviction rates are typical? I think that the tenant volunteers have documented beyond any reasonable discussion that Page Mill cannot count, and that Page Mill has a serious eviction problem. Another point for the Truth and a minus point for Page Mill for lame excuses of “confidentiality”. (They are in fact required by local law to provide this information to the City, but have refused) I think we also must give out a half-point on the bizarre for Mr. Shore’s seeming inability to grasp basic math. Page Mill 0, The Truth 3, The Bizarre 1.5
Page Mill’s spokespersons have represented many times to the rent board and to the City that they have “no intention of evicting people.” They have such a funny way of showing it! What is Page Mill planning to do with East Palo Alto other than to let units sit vacant for no reason? One can only ask which side of the incompetence/mendacity pendulum Page Mill’s Jim Shore and David Taran are on today. For now we can only add score: The Preposterous 1
Finally, last but not least: included in the Mercury article are several reports that Page Mill has intentionally refused to accept rent from tenants receiving “pay-or-quit” notices. Could it be that the blatant refusal to accept rents is in fact a Page Mill strategy to drive people out? Page Mill must merely claim the rent is a single day late, refuse to accept the rent, and start an eviction process? Clearly Whitley Property Management does the right (and legal) thing, allowing tenants who fall behind on their rent to catch up and stay in their apartment. Page Mill, on the other hand, seems to squeeze the eviction trigger with the glee of a ten-year old with a bb-gun.
How widespread are these refusals to accept rent payments? If you have experienced a refusal of rent from Page Mill, please write to us at mail@pagemillwatch.com, and we’ll preserve your confidentiality and try to do the truth some good.
Let Page Mill know: we’re going to do some more digging into some of Mr. Shore’s other claims, and we’ll report back here soon. Oh by the way, if anyone from Page Mill cares to write in to tell us what you think the score should be, please do write. We promise to reprint your response in toto on the website.
“Zennie62″ nothing but a Page Mill Smear-for-Dollars Campaigner
Posted by admin in Page Mill Properties, Page Mill's Misinformation Campaign, Uncategorized on May 10th, 2009
The “video blogger” known as “Zennie62″ has posted a number of misinformed, slanderous, and just downright bizarre videos on Page Mill Properties such that a number of stories have appeared speculating on who this guy is, who has apparently never been to East Palo Alto, but who has filled google searches with obviously fake opinion pieces about the wonderful job Page Mill is supposedly doing. (We won’t link to Zennie because he wants to create fake controversy—but don’t worry, if you google “Page Mill” and “Zennie” you’ll find him: many, many copies of him with same junk.)
Obviously, Zennie is a paid PR flack and his videos seem to be produced by the same people who have created a “Page Mill Channel” on Youtube. Wow, I’m sure they are watching that over at the homeless shelters. Anybody who has ever had anything to do with East Palo Alto or Page Mill has strongly suspected that the people on the videos that Page Mill produces are not just being selectively edited, but rather are get money for saying everything is Mah-velous in EPA.
New information has come to light on how toxic and corrupt Zennie apparently is, which is to say that he’s just as corrupt as the people paying him, and that includes the ever-loving toxic crew at Chevron-Texaco, who seem to be willing to pay Zennie to spew nonsense reports about Chevron’s wonderful environmental stance in Ecuador. The P.R. man Sam Singer of Singer & Associates is the paid spokesperson for the wave of “upbeat” news stories that Page Mill inundates us with to try to get people to not pay attention to the disaster. It is disgusting that the same guys will glibly justify turning a people’s homeland into a cancer trap are driving people out of their homes in East Palo Alto. But anything for a buck, eh Zennie and Sam?
Encourage your friends to stop filling their tank at Chevron, and send a letter to your senator about how offensive disinformation campaigns are to anyone who values the truth. And please, don’t feed Zennie the troll.
Does Skyline Boulevard intersect with Page Mill Road?
Posted by admin in Page Mill Properties on May 10th, 2009
Interesting article in the The San Francisco Business Journal concerning Skyline Realty, the embattled San Francisco housing portfolio. Using Massive leverage in the 1990s and 2000s, the Lembi family gobbled up housing at a tremendous rate, using high leverage and hard-ball tactics to drive rent control tenants out to take advantage of vacancy decontrol.
Maybe The Costa-Hawkins Residential Housing Act, the law that got the ball rolling on incentivizing landlord harassment of tenants, should be revised to limit this incentive to break rent control with crazy schemes? Leaving behind a mountain of debt and having senselessly evicted many tenants, the slow-motion collapse of the Lembi fortune shows the dangers of reverse leverage and the perversity of seeking high- and fast- profits in established residential housing.
At any rate, too much news on the mortgage crisis has focused on blaming the little guy: but what about these commercial based mortgage securities? What about those who cultivated the central myth of predatory equity schemes, which was that rents would actually go up in times of mortgage crisis?
Suit #10: More “bizarre claims” from Page Mill
Posted by admin in Page Mill Properties on May 6th, 2009
An interesting article appeared a few days ago in the Mercury News, involving the strange story of what is (by our count) Page Mill’s tenth suit against the City of East Palo Alto. Apparently, the suit involves Page Mill trying to sue the city over a property exemption it has never brought before the Rent Stabilization Board. Or maybe it’s just an attempt to sue the city for its own sake? The Court ruled that Page Mill had no valid claim before the court, and the City’s attorney has labeled the action “bizarre.”