By Jonathan Friedman
Associate Editor

December 18, 2015 -- Rent Control Board member Todd Flora used cleaned-up profanity at the Dec. 10 meeting to describe a Santa Monica landlord who had illegally charged extra rent to a tenant on Bay Street because she had a roommate.

“Anyone can own a gun in this country and apparently any a-hole can own a building as well,” Flora said. “Instead of a rent decrease petition, I think sometimes we should have an owner out petition.”

The property owner, Sadie Eliga, had forced the tenant to pay an extra $100 per month in cash without the eligibility of a receipt, staff told board members.

Staff said the tenant had asked Eliga if she could get a roommate because she needed more money to pay the rent because she was no longer eligible for Section 8 assistance.

Eliga said this was OK, staff said, as long as she paid extra money in cash. Forcing extra payment for a roommate is not legal, staff said.

A hearing officer determined Eliga had charged excess rent and should pay the maximum penalty of $500. The landlord appealed this decision, which was before the Rent Control Board.

Eliga did not deny she had charged excess rent, staff said, but she challenged whether she should have to pay the fine due to a technicality.

Neither Eliga nor the tenant spoke at the board meeting.

The board voted unanimously to uphold the hearing officer’s decision. Flora asked staff if the fine could be increased, but was told this was not possible under the regulations.

Flora said he was particularly frustrated by this situation.
“It’s just a prime example of the bad apples out there,” he said.

Also during the meeting, the board heard from Bill Davids, a resident of a 90-unit building on San Vicente Boulevard near Fourth Street, who requested it pass a regulation limiting the amount of surcharges tenants can face after the property tax rate increases.

Davids told the board the building had recently been sold for $45 million after changing hands for $7 million several years earlier, “based on what [he and other tenants] were able to locate on the Internet.”

Once County officials conduct a new assessment of the building, the property tax rate will greatly increase, and at least a portion of that burden would be passed onto the tenants, Davids said.

“We believe we are going to be hit very substantially with new surcharges based upon the whopping valuation our building will have once there is an assessment,” he said.

He continued, “We are basically waiting with great trepidation about the increase in surcharges we are going to be facing.”

Davids said a person with accounting knowledge told him the hike could be as much as $100 per month per unit. He told the board this increase could mean some tenants would be forced to leave their apartment.

Since Davids' comments were made about an item that was not on the agenda, board members were prohibited from responding. They asked staff to provide information about the issue at an upcoming meeting.

“I would like [the information to be given to the board] sooner than later,” Board member Nicole Phillis said.