Nothing has polarized Richmond and the Richmond City Council like rent control. And it’s not over; like a bad penny, it will keep coming back again and again to dominate Richmond politics. In the coming months, there will amendments to fix the flaws in the ordinance, nomination and approval (or rejection) of appointed Rent Board members, ramping up of the rent board with hearings and adjudications, and eventually the campaign and election to determine if a Charter amendment will be approved for an elected rent board, and if successful, the campaign and election of Rent Board members.

During and following the final week when the first and second reading of the rent control and just cause ordinance was passed, I got a lot of email from constituents, all of which was passionate but firmly planted on one side or the other of the rent control issue.

Those on the winning side excoriated me, characterizing my continuing opposition to rent control with words like “distaste,” “petty,” “whining coward,” “poor loser,” “beneath the dignity,” “vitriolic attacks,” “childish and vindictive,”lunkhead,” and “sniping and demeaning.” One person wrote: “Tom - I'm sick of your childish emails.  Please stop them.”

On the losing side, E-FORUM readers sympathized with messages like, “I'm sure it's tough being the adult on the council;” “Thank you for you work in opposing the newly adopted rent control ordinance” and “But your voice adds a note of reasonableness and pragmatism that is, unfortunately, often missing from the voices of some of your colleagues, who seem disconnected from the reality of what the conditions really are in Richmond.”

Rent control also generated lots of criticism of the RPA and the RPA-dominated City Council, some of it coming from RPA members. Examples include: “We still have a divided council run by The RPA, for the RPA, not for RICHMOND as a whole but for the same few same as the last council;” “RPA is a plague, not good for Richmond. Thank you for running for mayor!” and “The RPA is destroying the city and making a mockery of things.”

A few people said they voted for me and were disappointed. One asked for his campaign contribution back. People who support rent control and the RPA are prone to the belief that the RPA is faultless, and to oppose anything they stand for is somewhere between incomprehensible and treason.

Some people who say they voted for me in the 2014 campaign seemed to think I was an RPA clone. However, I told anyone who asked that I opposed rent control, even ACCE, which endorsed me anyway.

Some people believe that the mayor should be a neutral party who goes along with whatever political direction the City Council majority directs. This is not the way it works. The Charter states that the mayor is a “political position” and the mayor “…may develop and inform City residents of policies and programs which he or she believes are necessary for the welfare of the City.” Just because the City Council majority support rent control, for now, does not change my opinion of what is “…necessary for the welfare of the City.”

During National Night Out, dozens of people approached me and thanked me for my stance against rent control. Not a single person told me I was wrong.

The point is that rent control was a clear victory for the RPA and their collaborators, but at what cost, both in terms of a financial burden on the City and in opportunity for City Council collaboration in the future?

Several writers criticized me for selectively quoting the Chip Johnson article, but another copied a letter she wrote to Johnson:

Dear Chip

I found your August 6th column on the passage of Richmond's rent-control ordinance remarkably misleading. You point out that not all members were present at Wednesdays meeting, "Pimple was out of the country. Butt was out having a drink". True, but you imply their absence was a frivolous or willful neglect of duty in order to go on with your characterization of Mayor Butt being "on vacation" on this issue. Cute writing, poor reporting. You don't mention that the meeting held on August 5th was a special session, called for when the entire council was scheduled to be on vacation. When the extra session to vote on the ordinance was proposed by Gail McLaughlin, Mayor Butt stated that he already had plans for that night. Gail said that didn't matter, as the four supporters on the council needed to pass the ordinance had told her in advance that they would be available. "We are back on track" according to Gail's subsequent email.

Your article does a disservice to the discussion of the Richmond "battle" surrounding rent-control by, possibly inadvertently, buying into or exacerbating the hostility being directed at the Mayor by several members on the council. The Mayor was not the only one questioning this ordinance. People in total agreement with the idea of rent stabilization and adoption of policies to protect Richmond renters were discouraged from questioning the specifics of this ordinance by being characterized as "haters". We were told that problematic parts of the ordinance would be "fixed later". That speed of adoption should take precedence over thoughtful consideration or discussion of financing. I was invited by progressives, on several occasions, to attend council meetings in support of this ordinance without ever being given access to a copy to read. I got my copy from the Mayor, without consideration on his part as to my being for or against adoption. 

A better public policy idea does not always generate better public policy or guarantee the writing of good legislation. A right choice can come about in the wrong way. Remains to be seen how Richmond will fair with this new ordinance and its amalgamation of good intention and divisive adaptation.

(Name deleted) Richmond resident

Following are examples of emails I received from supporters of rent control:

• I've lived in Richmond two years and voted for you last year. I'm surfacing to express distaste for your petty-sounding emails when you don't get your way with the City Council. Surely there is a more constructive approach. The minute I saw your "Let the Gloating Begin" headline I knew you were at it again. Please step back and realize it's local politics, which, like all politics, is personal. I suggest you rise above it and get done what you can. Obama's been doing it for seven years. p.s. Glad you had a nice vacation, but the photos were a bit much. Less is more always.
• Actually the vote on the final reading was 4 to1 (an 80% plurality) , with the whining cowards taking a hike.  You are such a poor loser.  Pitiful.  Anyway I can get a return of the $300 I gave to your campaign?
• You are picking and choosing, and certainly spinning.  I am disappointed.  I have tried to think better things will eventually come from you.  This is a council of the majority, not a club that you run for your own ends.  As I wrote before, we are trying to do the best we can for as many people in Richmond as we can, and for once the ones most vulnerable, from our perspectives.  We are not GOD.
• Your very selective reporting of Chip Johnson's column on the passage Richmond rent control is beneath the dignity a person of leadership status. Chip Johnson said you were truly on vacation - from your senses. Is this a permanent vacation? Your Booze like vitriolic attacks on the progressives are totally offensive and border on the truly insane. Your former supporter,
• I'm going to say this again.  Your childish and vindictive attitude reflects only on your own character.  We are stunned to see that you are blind to that, quoting from an article but even leaving off the comment "on the issue of rent control, its like he took a vacation from sound thinking" (Chip Johnson), and you left out the headline "Richmond makes right call on rent control." So even though the guy does not like us liberals, he has made a judgment you ignore. I can accept that you are against rent control, and I can respect that you have a right to that point of view. It makes sense.  But your nasty, vindictive and really childish tantrums are a complete surprise coming from someone who we thought had maturity and substance.  You were elected mayor of a city in which the Richmond Progressive Alliance has deep participation and respect. In the years we have lived here the improvements are tangible. They are huge. We loved taking part in the election. I came to your office and made calls. Your vitriol appears to be insane.  You should address your emotional and personality problems in private with some kind of counseling or therapy. It is ridiculous that a grown man should continue to act out so rudely when he does not get his way.  It is reflecting negatively only on you.
• What a lunk head you are. You otta try reading Bill Lindsay's report on the Moody report. At first I thought you had authored that review and I thought how level headed you could be. Then I saw the signature at the end. Alas Mayor Lunkhead! Your former supporter,
• Would you be happier if we passed rent control and just cause eviction by a ballot initiative?  We did that in Berkeley and we can do that in Richmond.   The landlords brought rent control to Richmond with their 18%+  rent increases notices in the last eighteen months.  We voted for a progressive Council and we can vote for a rent control initiative if you think you can defeat this one with procedural tricks. 
• You cannot take it. You have constantly been sniping and demeaning the progressives for a long time. You distort the meanings of simple words like "greedy landlords" to mean "open season" instead of landlords who are greedy and then  claim to never have heard of any instance where any landlord has been greedy and then speculate that the RPA has some abhorrence of the word "lord" and then throw endless words on your invective pile. And you still find time to meet with your realtor friends.
• Go to the Council meeting.  Understand that those of us who voted for you also voted for them.   Stop taking everything personally!  You are going to have a heart attack.

And here are samples of emails from people who oppose rent control:

• Tell Richmond a sad Happy birthday. I have to celebrate it because I live here, but I am not at all happy about the direction we are headed again.  We still have a divided council run by The RPA, for the RPA, not for RICHMOND as a whole but for the same few same as the last council. 
• I have been both a landlady and tenant under Berkeley and Oakland rent control for many years.  As a small time landlady (who works for a nonprofit as an attendant for those with disabilities), one of the reasons I purchased property in Richmond was due to the lack of rent control.  I believe single family dwellings are exempt from the rent control part (the control of rent charged) but those who own them and rent them out are subject to just cause for eviction.  However, when I tried to clarify this with the City of Oakland Rent Board they were very evasive.  Any lawyers out there who can confirm this?
• A developer proposing to build a few hundred condominiums in Richmond must spend many thousands of dollars to fund an EIR, which (theoretically, anyway) pre-identifies the impacts to the community of building the project. There should be an EIR for acts of the City Council which pre-identifies the cost to the taxpayers of a program, the cost to landlords and the economy, the costs to the community for the resulting shabby buildings when rents fail to cover maintenance expenses, and the damage to the lives of the small owners of rental units who have worked hard to secure income-producing property.  You have done a great job educating everyone about the reality of rent control.  It is sad that the majority on the Council members are ignorant of the laws of Supply and Demand.  They must have missed that lecture at school, and instead attended the lecture on Magical Realism.  Next they will claim that it is unfair to be overweight, and work to suspend the laws of gravity.
• Thank you for you work in opposing the newly adopted rent control ordinance. As a property owner in Richmond I am deeply worried about the adverse impacts this ordinance will have on the community socially and economically. I own one small single family home in Richmond North and East that I rent. My property is a very important part of my retirement plan and I need to be able to sell it as I need the money for retirement. The ordinance, as I read it, does not give any information about permitting eviction for the purpose of selling. This is of great concern to me. I tried to call the City Attorney's office for clarification on this and other questions as you mentioned in your email update. The City Attorney's office said they could not help and information will come out sometime in the future from the City Manager's office. I need help and information now. Do you know who I can speak with before this ordinance goes into effect? Thanks for any help you can provide.
• And I was so optimistic after Richmond's last election. At least they have a great Mayor.
• I love you , Tom!!!  Telling it like it is :)  I see that Gayle is giving a lecture on the powerfulness of the RPA later this month in the library.  Such a humble person! Will the Apartment Owners Association sue the City?  Probably.
  I'm sure it's tough being the adult on the council. Well written email. Of course we know that New Progressive is just a redo for 'old liberal', but a question came to mind. ? Do the RPA understand that rent control is a deeply conservative program. It's an attempt to preserve the status quo, an attempt to hold onto the idealized present.  It does NOT help the housing situation. From a Willy Nelson song, loosely, 'I can fold my first up nice and tight. But I can't hold back the sands of time".
• I just don't get how you guys are not considering the bigger picture. Lose that and all kinds of contradictions start appearing. For instance, spend $100K on how to improve Richmond's image while passing rent control. How are these contradictory? One word. Blight. If I read it correctly, exempt from rent control are single occupancy homes and apt buildings built after 1995. So what does that leave? Older multiplex  buildings that are prone to needing more maintenance and upkeep than their much younger counterparts.  By strictly limiting rent increases, the landlord gets hamstrung. Sure, there are likely options for making capital improvements, but to add more burden to the landlord to jump through hoops means deferred maintenance will likely pile up, creating numerous Hacienda situations. And what does that create? Blight. When renters face resistance in getting basic repairs, they quit doing their part to maintain the neighborhood. Having "bad tenants" who cannot be evicted leads to resentment on the part of the landlord, resulting in even less responsiveness. And the cycle perpetuates. Property values I am sure have already plummeted as a result of this vote. Income properties with a limit on their income generating potential are going to be devalued, and even more so as these older buildings become more and more rundown. And I find it not coincidental that Richmond got another credit downgrade.  That's because  a city council who makes poor long range decisions is less likely to lead in a fiscally responsible way. And if you want to ensure that the word "slum" remains synonymous with Richmond, keep rent control. No one need pay 100K to figure that one out.  Sheesh.
• If it’s an expensive disaster, what's the quickest way to end it?  Also, I'm wondering if we'll see law suits that could cost the City precious dollars? I was a renter in SF and Berkeley where rent control was and is highly ineffective, so I'm obviously not a fan.   There's got to be better solutions.
• RPA is a plague, not good for Richmond. Thank you for running for mayor!
• But you forgot Tom. Rent control won't cost the city anything. Greedy developers will foot the bill. ITS LIKE FREE MONEY.
• The RPA is destroying the city and making a mockery of things. They're going to run us right into bankruptcy. They need to be recalled 
• I can understand how you feel, and I realize you are outvoted on this issue.  But your voice adds a note of reasonableness and pragmatism that is, unfortunately, often missing from the voices of some of your colleagues, who seem disconnected from the reality of what the conditions really are in Richmond.  I hope you will reconsider and attend tonight's meeting so that you can go on record fo This is pretty shocking, Tom. What are the consequences, if any, of violating the Brown Act? I would imagine that, at minimum, any proposed regulation voted in under these circumstances could not go into effect. And is there no means of formally reprimanding those who violate the Brown Act? As for Myrick's well-intentioned lie, there is no way I could ever again trust what he says in any circumstances. Perhaps he simply isn't smart or sophisticated enough to be able to stall his constituency effectively without resorting to outright lying. I predict a short-lived career in politics for him. What a shame our city council has come to this. Again. r your fair minded stance on the issue. Thanks for representing us so well,
• This makes me really sad, I've been a Richmond resident for many years and I've been so proud of our city basically lifting itself by its bootstraps, especially having you on the council and having Chief Magnus and Bill Lindsay.  I though Gayle was an honest Mayor which is why I voted to put her on the council. Lying, especially in an elected position, totally turns me off though and I've lost confidence that these people have our best interests at heart.  Please keep us informed and I WILL be watching this council closely from here on....   Thanks again Tom!
• I AM SO SORRY TO HEAR HOW BADLY OUR NEWLY ELECTED COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE "WORKING FOR THE COMMON GOOD" THAT WE SO THOUGHTFULLY ELECTED THEM TO DO. I HAD HIGH HOPES THAT RICHMOND WOULD GET ITS ACT TOGETHER. INSTEAD, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE CREATING FODDER FOR THE MEDIA.
• How about starting a recall vote to coincide with the rent control board election?

So, for now, we are a house divided. I hope we can stand.