Council should convert its opinion on condos

DANETTE GOULET

There is a point when City Council members have to stop thinking

about the whole and consider what is right. Stop doing what may be

best for the city on paper and follow their conscience.

City Council members insist owners must pay in-lieu fees for the

affordable rental housing lost when their properties were illegally

converted.

“A bunch of apartments have been lost -- so does all of this city

pay that?” Councilman Dave Sullivan asked.

Should it be passed on to the whole city? Should it come out of

city coffers?

No. Those responsible need to pay.

How difficult can it really be to find out who converted the

condos and skipped the steps of getting permits and paying fees? How

tricky is it to follow the paper trail to the seller? I know, I know

-- the investigation is underway.

In the meantime, stop kicking the guy who is down.

If I take out a library book and give it (or sell it) to someone

else, the library doesn’t go after the person I gave the book to.

They would come looking for me to pay the late fees or pay for the

book. It was my responsibility.

Even if the city believes the title companies will fork that money

over in the end (sure it may take a civil lawsuit, but the city will

have its money, right?) it’s not the right way to go.

Forget for a moment that City Council members were elected to

represent those 102 or so property owners who were swindled. For

every one resident suckered there are at least two residents who seem

to be outraged over the treatment of those who were tricked, because

it could just as easily be any one of them.

And no one wants to think that if something like this happens,

they’ll get doubly shafted by the people they voted into office to

look out for them.

Besides possible lack of attention to detail or ignorance of real

estate law, these people paid for what they thought were condos. The

conversion and all that it entailed was not their responsibility.

The city has every right to charge the usual fees for inspections,

perhaps with a discount for the shortened process that will require

fewer man hours, but to ask for about $20,000 restitution for an

affordable-housing fee is outrageous.

Even if they have the best of intentions, city officials just look

greedy. Maybe the city’s chief concern here is maintaining the level

of affordable housing, but it is coming across as a way to stuff city

pockets. I don’t doubt the money would go to the right place, but

that money needs to come from the right place.

Make a vigorous and concerted effort to find those responsible.

Don’t just charge residents and figure the whole thing will go away

and blow over. The city needs to actively protect residents,

especially the council -- that’s why we vote for them. Not just to

fight their issues but to fight ours.

* DANETTE GOULET is the city editor. She can be reached at (714)

965-7170 or by e-mail at danette.goulet@latimes.com.