"Everything Is Changing" - Californians Struggling With High Rent Prices, End Of Eviction Moratoriums
[2:20 PM | 0 comments ]

"Everything Is Changing" - Californians Struggling With High Rent Prices, End Of Eviction Moratoriums

Authored by Travis Gillmore via The Epoch Times,

With some of the most expensive rent prices in the nation, Californians pay a disproportionate share of income for housing, and with evictions now returning after nearly three years of moratoriums in certain locations, some property owners and renters are finding themselves in difficult predicaments.

More than 768,000 households are behind on rent in the Golden State, with debts totaling more than $5 billion, putting approximately 721,000 children at risk of eviction, according to the National Equity Atlas—a collaborative data and analytics tool founded by Oakland-based Policy Link and the University of Southern California Equity Research Institute.

Residents in the City of Los Angeles are facing a deadline of Aug. 1 to repay all rental debt accrued between March 2020 and September 2021, with that from October 2021 to January 31, 2023, due by February 2024.

With the first deadline imminent, Mayor Karen Bass and the city council are working to assist overburdened renters with a series of programs allowing applicants to request financial aid.

Renters and housing advocates attend a protest to cancel rent and avoid evictions amid the Coronavirus pandemic in Los Angeles on Aug. 21, 2020. (Valerie Macon/AFP via Getty Images)

Renters make up nearly half of the state’s population, with an estimated 17 million people leasing their homes out of 39.5 million residents, and rising prices are impacting their ability to make ends meet, according to Legislative analyses.

Average rent prices in California are $2,902 across all sizes and property types, according to online real estate listing company Zillow as of July 21.

Based on current listings in many areas like Orange, San Diego, Santa Clara, or San Francisco counties, homes with three bedrooms and space to accommodate a family cost at least $4,000 a month to rent.

Supply and demand are to blame, with less housing available than is needed fueling a progressive increase in rental prices, according to economists.

Rent increase limits for existing tenants were established with the passage in 2019 of Assembly Bill 1482, known as the California Tenant Protection Act, setting a 5 percent plus the cost of inflation or 10 percent, whichever is lower, as the highest adjustment allowed.

New leases are not subject to the same protection, thus further incentivizing landlords to evict slow or non-paying and at-fault tenants, according to experts.

A "For Lease" sign is posted in front of a house available for rent in Los Angeles on March 15, 2022. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Meanwhile, stakeholders on both sides of the rental equation have raised questions about various regulations instituted during the pandemic.

Some landlords report dealing with stressful moments when renters were not paying, and they had no legal recourse to evict for non-payment, yet their mortgage payments continued to be due monthly.

“It put all the headache on the property owner,” John Morgan, owner of multiple rental properties in Northern California, told The Epoch Times.

“I understand some tenants were unable to pay. But some of these situations we saw across the state were people taking advantage of the moratorium. They just stopped paying and used the money to fund a better lifestyle.”

The California Apartment Association has brought attention to the matter by filing lawsuits to limit renter protection mandates, lobbying lawmakers, and presenting stories of landlords that were owed significant sums—one more than $108,000—in back rent from families that simply chose to stop paying because they could not be evicted.

Now with the state COVID moratoriums rescinded in June 2022 and municipal protections slowly coming to a close—with the exception of San Francisco, which is extending its policies for some low-income residents—evictions are starting to climb.

“We don’t ever want to evict anyone, but we have bills to pay, and when they’re mounting up, it weighs on our family,” Mr. Morgan said.

“If I can’t pay the mortgage, I don’t have a house to offer for rent.”

Dozens of people hold up signs protesting against an eviction moratorium while a property owner sitting in a wheelchair continues his hunger strike in Oakland, Calif., on Feb. 26, 2023. (Xue Mingzhu/The Epoch Times)

On the other hand, renters are faced with inflationary pressures and an uncertain economic future, with layoffs occurring in high-paying technology and finance fields in the state this year, and some rural areas experiencing economic upheaval with mounting losses reported by many businesses involved in the cannabis industry.

“It’s been tougher to find a job and steady income this year than at any time since I moved here in 2009,” Maria Aguilera, a restaurant employee and mother of two living in Mendocino County, told The Epoch Times.

“Everything is changing, people have less money to spend, so we’re making less in tips. Most of my money goes to rent and utilities because housing is so expensive.”

Recognizing the issues facing renters in the state, a group of lawmakers—themselves renters—formed the Renters Caucus, a bicameral group of five Democrats dedicated to addressing rental-related housing concerns.

Chaired by Assemblyman Matt Haney (D-San Francisco), the caucus includes fellow Assemblymembers Alex Lee (D-Milpitas), Isaac Bryan (D-Culver City), Tasha Boerner (D-Carlsbad), and Sen. Aisha Wahab (D-Fremont).

Several proposals were introduced this year to strengthen renters’ protection, with one such measure, Senate Bill 567—authored by Sen. María Elena Durazo (D-Los Angeles) and designed to limit rent increases to 5 percent annually—finding itself watered down in the legislative process. With price caps now stripped from its text, the bill will next be considered by the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Apartments in Santa Ana, Calif., on Feb. 10, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

Assembly Bill 12, introduced by Mr. Haney, the renters’ caucus chair, would reduce the amount of security deposit allowable from two months’ rent for an unfurnished dwelling and three months’ for furnished to the amount equal to one month’s rent for any new residential lease.

The bill passed the Assembly and all Senate committees and will be debated on the Senate floor once legislative meetings resume in August following the summer recess.

The author notes the importance of the bill in the analysis provided to the Legislature, as high up-front costs prevent some residents from obtaining housing, citing statistics that show average deposits of $8,000 in Los Angeles and $10,000 in San Francisco. Most landlords require first and last month along with a deposit when securing a lease.

“While many families are able to afford their monthly rent, the requirement for two or three months’ rent solely for a security deposit places a financial burden on many who cannot afford it,” Mr. Haney argued in support of the bill in the Assembly’s analysis. “As a result, many families have to choose between acquiring more debt to afford their security deposit or not being approved for their much-needed housing.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 07/30/2023 - 16:30
https://ift.tt/odQphWa
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/odQphWa
via IFTTT

"Everything Is Changing" - Californians Struggling With High Rent Prices, End Of Eviction Moratoriums SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
"Like Organized Crime" - Multiple Banks Filed Over 170 'Suspicious Activity' Reports On The Bidens
[2:20 PM | 0 comments ]

"Like Organized Crime" - Multiple Banks Filed Over 170 'Suspicious Activity' Reports On The Bidens

As the evidence for at least an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden mounts, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and co-host Ben Ferguson discussed the latest bombshell - 170 suspicious activity reports (SARs) from six banks over the past few years - on their podcast with House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-KY).

As Townhall reports, these SARs are submitted and sent to the Treasury Department when banks "have a strong suspicion" that a crime has been committed, so as to protect the bank.

As Comer emphasized, these are submitted "very seldom."

If someone were to have two, the chairman explained, it would be hard for that person to open up a bank account.

Submitting an SAR, Comer added, also is "inviting the regulators to come in and regulate," which is the last thing banks want.

The 170 reports are thus quite significant. 

To paint the scene here, Comer explained that what might trigger an SAR is "a large transaction that comes out of the blue."

As @KanekoaTheGreat lays out in his detailed tweet: (emphasis ours)

BREAKING🚨 Rep. James Comer says six banks, including JP Morgan, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo, submitted over 170 suspicious activity reports to the Treasury Department regarding the Biden family, alleging their involvement in money laundering, human trafficking, and tax fraud.

The American banks also raised concerns about wire transfers received by the Bidens from foreign state-owned entities, notably from the Chinese government, allegedly for the purpose of money laundering and tax evasion.

The foreign wires were found to be directed towards Biden's business associates before being funneled through 20 shell companies associated with the Bidens. Subsequently, the funds were distributed among various Biden family members.

SARs are vital documents that financial institutions must file with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) when they suspect any cases of money laundering or fraudulent activities.

Rep. Comer highlighted one specific SAR linked to a $3 million wire from China to Biden's business partner, Rob Walker.

This money was received in an inactive account that had maintained a $50,000 balance for ten years before the significant wire transaction from China.

Within just 24 hours of receiving the wire, Walker initiated incremental payments to several Biden shell companies, eventually disbursing funds to four different Biden family members.

Comer explained that concealing the source of money through the use of shell companies to deceive the IRS is considered money laundering and racketeering. 

He noted that if the funds were intended for legitimate purposes, they could have been wired directly to Hunter Biden, but instead, they were routed through business partners and various companies with no clear legitimate purpose.

Senator Ted Cruz asked, "So the Chinese Communist government was sending the money?"

Rep. Comer replied, "Yes."

"If Hunter Biden was doing something legitimate for China, they could have just wired the money to Hunter Biden, but they didn't," he explained. 

"They sent it to a company called Robinson Walker. Then they wired it to a company called Owasco. Then they wired it to another company called Bohai. These companies don't do anything with the money."

Senator Cruz responded, "It's just a bucket to pour the water in, then a bucket to pour it into somewhere else?" 

Rep Comer said, "That's exactly what it is and it was organized. This is like organized crime."

When the corporate media foolishly asks where is the evidence that the Bidens committed crimes?

American banks have submitted hundreds of suspicious activity reports on the Biden family, alleging their involvement in human trafficking, money laundering, and tax fraud. 

Congressional investigators have obtained bank account records and wire transfer statements on twenty shell companies owned by the Bidens, which were allegedly used for laundering illegally obtained money from China, Russia, Ukraine, Romania, and Kazakhstan as unregistered foreign agents. 

This evidence is supported by hundreds of thousands of emails, tens of thousands of text messages, photographs, audio recordings, calendar statements, and ten years of data from Hunter Biden's laptop, which the FBI took into its possession in 2019. @MarcoPolo501c3 published a comprehensive "Report on the Biden Laptop," documenting 459 alleged crimes involving the Biden family and their associates, including 140 business crimes, 191 sex crimes, and 128 drug crimes.

A $1,000 reward is offered for any verifiable corrections, but thus far, no crimes have been disputed.

In addition, credible IRS whistleblowers have accused the Justice Department of obstructing the Hunter Biden investigation by blocking felony charges, search warrants, and interviews while preventing any investigation of the President and his family.

Furthermore, just yesterday, a judge highlighted an unprecedented lenient deal offered by the Justice Department to Hunter Biden, which would result in no felony charges or jail time for tax fraud and lying on a gun form.

This DOJ deal would have also granted protection to the First Son from any future prosecution related to illegally obtained money from foreign nations as an unregistered foreign agent.

What is more corrosive and destructive to our nation than a politicized Justice Department that applies different legal standards depending on whether one's last name is Trump or Biden?

With Hunter Biden's sweetheart plea-deal now eviscerated, will the mainstream media find any of this "suspicious activity", suspicious enough to warrant a report?

Tyler Durden Sun, 07/30/2023 - 16:00
https://ift.tt/Avng3X7
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/Avng3X7
via IFTTT

"Like Organized Crime" - Multiple Banks Filed Over 170 'Suspicious Activity' Reports On The Bidens SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
RFK Jr. Says Biden DHS Won't Provide Secret Service Protection
[6:20 PM | 0 comments ]

RFK Jr. Says Biden DHS Won't Provide Secret Service Protection

RFK Jr., whose father was assassinated on the presidential campaign trail in 1968, says the Biden Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has denied his request for Secret Service protection.

"Since the assassination of my father in 1968, candidates for president are provided Secret Service protection. But not me," Kennedy tweeted.

"Our campaign’s request included a 67-page report from the world’s leading protection firm, detailing unique and well established security and safety risks aside from commonplace death threats."

A misleading community note was added to the tweet, which suggests that candidates will only be protected within 120 days of the general election...

The Secret Service's website suggests the same:

The actual text of the law, however, makes clear that the 120-day guidance is for spouses.

"Major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates and, within 120 days of the general Presidential election, the spouses of such candidates."

Punctuation matters.

Meanwhile, an argument for why Kennedy should receive SS protection:

(continued, emphasis ours)

The law authorizes Secret Service protection for major presidential and vice presidential candidates and their spouses within 120 days of the general presidential election. However, the evolution of the protective detail is based upon actual threats and acts of aggression against both the highest public office in the land and those who seek the position.

History shows there is precedent for candidates receiving protection >120 days ahead of the general election.

Donald Trump & Ben Carson were provided Secret Service protection 365 days before Election Day in 2015

Barack Obama was provided Secret Service protection 551 days before Election Day in 2007

RFK Jr is within the time range of the precedent set by the candidates above (465 days from Election Day) and is arguably under even greater threat given the Kennedy family’s tragic history of assassinations.

The Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas) has the discretion and the ability to approve or deny Secret Service coverage to presidential candidates at any point in the campaign.

Given that the Biden Administration began to censor RFK Jr within days of getting into the White House and is continuing that censorship even through last week’s censorship hearing, it is not surprising that a Biden appointee has denied a political opponent's request for Secret Service protection.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/29/2023 - 19:00
https://ift.tt/DSA7frR
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/DSA7frR
via IFTTT

RFK Jr. Says Biden DHS Won't Provide Secret Service Protection SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
Yellow Ceased "Regular Operations" On Friday
[4:20 PM | 0 comments ]

Yellow Ceased "Regular Operations" On Friday

By Rachel Premack of FreightWaves

Yellow, the third-largest less-than-truckload company that’s in the midst of financial chaos, said in a memo to laid-off, nonunion employees viewed by FreightWaves that the company was “shutting down regular operations”.

All locations will be closed and/or lay off some number of employees. As the memo stated:

“We regret to inform you that your employment with Yellow Corporation, or one of its subsidiaries, (collectively referred to as the ‘Company’) will permanently terminate on July 28, 2023, or within 14 days after (the ‘Separation Date’). The Company is shutting down its regular operations on July 28, 2023, closing and/or laying off employees at all of its locations, including yours (the ‘Shut Down’).”

 

The company on Friday morning laid off an unknown number of office employees, most of which were nonunion. It said in a memo to the laid-off employees that it was unable to alert them previously of this closing of business “because the Shut Down was not reasonably foreseeable.”

John Murphy, who is the Teamsters National Freight director, advised union employees to collect their belongings from all offices and terminals, in the case that Yellow shutters in the coming days and facilities are not accessible.

Murphy noted Teamsters is continuing to look for financing solutions for Yellow. However, he wrote, “the likelihood that Yellow will survive is increasingly bleak. Yellow continues to clear its system, and it appears to be laying off personnel and closing entire terminals across the country. All Yellow employees should, in our opinion, prepare for the worst, as Yellow appears to be headed to a complete shutdown within the next few days.”

Employees were notified of the layoffs on Friday morning in voice-only calls. At least three executives laid off large portions of their teams:

  • Yellow Chief Information Officer Annlea Rumfola informed her team of some 300 technology employees that Friday was their last day, according to an employee on the call.
  • Steve Selvig, vice president of customer care at Yellow, informed an unknown number of customer service employees that Friday was their last day, according to an employee on the call and a local news publication.
  • Yellow Chief Commercial Officer Jason Bergman invited the following teams to a call that said Friday was their last day: local sales divisions 1, 2 and 4; all inside sales; multiple regions of corporate sales; exhibit operations managers; and Yellow third-party logistics sales. This came from two employees on the call. FreightWaves reviewed screenshots of emails sent before and a recording of the call. A Yellow representative told FreightWaves after publication that not all teams invited were laid off.

These layoffs come ahead of a potential Yellow bankruptcy filing. A senior vice president said Yellow is expected to file for bankruptcy on Monday, according to three employees who attended an internal call in which the executive shared this news.

Terminated employees were instructed to receive information regarding their severance pay, health care, W-2s, and other key documents through an Oracle platform, as their access to company systems will be terminated on Friday. According to a memo distributed to terminated employees viewed by FreightWaves, severance for nonunion workers depends on title and length of tenure at the company:

It’s unclear why the Yellow third-party logistics sales team was invited to the layoff call, as the company is actively seeking to sell its logistics arm. A Yellow representative said in an emailed statement after the story was published that the Yellow Logistics organization has remained intact, including the Yellow Logistics salesforce.

A Yellow representative said in an emailed statement to FreightWaves after the story was published that customers can contact Yellow’s support line at 800-610-6500 or customer.care@myyellow.com.

“Yellow has retained a robust customer service team that is fully capable of handling inquiries and assisting with all support that customers might need,” the representative said.

Yellow, a 99-year-old company headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee, employs some 30,000 workers. About 22,000 of them are represented by the Teamsters union. Teamsters and Yellow have been locked in a monthslong strife over changing key work rules at the trucking fleet. Now, sources say Yellow may file for bankruptcy imminently. 

In a call to Yellow sales teams, Bergman shared a statement on the company’s potential shuttering — and pinned the blame on the Teamsters’ refusal to negotiate with the company:

“Since last January, we have made every attempt to meet with the IBT. The IBT’S refusal to negotiate for nine months, its freezing of our essential business plan, One Yellow and, finally, its strike authorizations caused customers to find alternative freight carriers and it’s had a catastrophic effect on our business. When IBT leaders were finally ready to meet this week, it was too late. By then, the IBT strike threat had already a devastating impact on our business, [unclear] investors and causing customers to quickly depart. Given this impact to our business, we are forced to announce additional headcount reductions of non-union employees.”

In a memo published to members Thursday night, Teamsters blamed Yellow’s management for the company’s financial issues:

“In the meantime, TNFINC and the IBT continue to try to work with the Government to determine whether there is a way to protect the Teamster families at Yellow. TNFINC and the IBT remain willing to work with Yellow and its lenders or potential lenders. Hope, however, is fading. Unfortunately, despite more than a decade of concessions totaling billions of dollars given to the Company by Teamster members as well as a massive government bailout loan in 2020, Yellow may finally be succumbing to its enormous debt burden.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/29/2023 - 18:00
https://ift.tt/V2kTtX1
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/V2kTtX1
via IFTTT

Yellow Ceased "Regular Operations" On Friday SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
Navy Gets The Nod: President Biden Acknowledges The Existence Of His Fifth Granddaughter
[3:20 PM | 0 comments ]

Navy Gets The Nod: President Biden Acknowledges The Existence Of His Fifth Granddaughter

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

For her entire life, Navy Joan Roberts has been “she who must not be named.”

There is no evidence that her father has ever visited her, let alone held her. 

Her grandparents repeatedly denied her existence and said that they had only “four granddaughters.”

They even gave their dogs stockings at Christmas rather than Navy, who never even bit one let alone a score of Secret Service agents.

As even Democrats began to voice their own shock at the cruelty of the First Couple shunning this child, the Bidens finally relented and recognized her existence, but only barely so.

Pressed by Fox News, the White House issued this statement:

“Our son Hunter and Navy’s mother, Lunden, are working together to foster a relationship that is in the best interests of their daughter, preserving her privacy as much as possible going forward. This is not a political issue, it’s a family matter. Jill and I only want what is best for all of our grandchildren, including Navy.”

Even for those of us who merely followed this saga from the beginning, the statement was maddening and frankly insulting. It suggested that there was some reason, until now, that prevented the Bidens from acknowledging the existence of their fifth granddaughter. That is false. There was no legal, or even tactical, reason for the refusal of the First Couple to acknowledge Navy for four years.

Navy and her mother sought that recognition and the Bidens refused. How was that in the “best interests” of this child? Were they fostering a relationship when they gave the German Shepherds stockings at Christmas but not their grandchild?

Moreover, Hunter has not been “working together” with Lunden for the best interests of his daughter. He has been a callous cad throughout this process, consistently putting his own interests ahead of his child.

Hunter refused to admit that he was Navy’s father for years until forced to accept the results of a court-ordered DNA test.

He then fought child support and even her use of the name Biden. He was threatened repeatedly with contempt of court over his obstruction in the litigation in Arkansas. The statement that he has been working together with Lunden is insulting to anyone who has followed these court proceedings, let alone their granddaughter.

In June, Hunter settled the Arkansas child support case on the condition that Lunden agreed to withdraw her request to change their child’s last name to “Biden.”

Washington is a hard town. I have lived and worked here for decades and I am still amazed by the cold calculations of many in this city. Long-standing values and associations are routinely jettisoned for personal advantage. Here the moral strictures of the rest of the nation are flipped; vice is a virtue and integrity is a weakness.

Yet, even in this place of utter personal corruption, the Bidens shocked the local population. It was not their millions in influence peddling. The Bidens are standouts but hardly unique in that form of corruption. It is not the President’s obvious lies about his knowledge and ties to his son’s foreign dealings. Truth is as relative in Washington as loyalty in this city. However, few have the stomach for how the Bidens treated this little girl. The Bidens spent more time fretting over the “pressure” of the White House on Major and Commander than they did the emotional impact on a four-year-old child who was prevented from even calling herself a Biden.

So what changed after four years to compel this passing recognition in a press statement? It was not the litigation. There was never any legal reason not to recognize their granddaughter since it was confirmed by DNA and court order. It was not any sudden request of the child or her mother. They have been asking for years for such recognition.

It was more likely the disgust expressed even by Democrats that this is simply wrong. The President is about to head out on the campaign trail and had no answer to that objection. In other words, for the First Couple, it is a political not a family matter. If it were the latter, they would have done the decent thing years ago.

Of course, the President cannot go into his loving account of how his granddaughter is “a talker” and playful (like his German Shepherd) because he has never bothered to meet her.

That is now a matter for this little girl to contemplate as she gets older.

However, whatever the impetus of the sudden recognition of Navy’s existence, it was not any legal cause.

The First Couple was free to do the decent thing at any time over the last four years. They simply did not find it in their “best interest” to do so.

Tyler Durden Sat, 07/29/2023 - 17:30
https://ift.tt/ZnLG4lz
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/ZnLG4lz
via IFTTT

Navy Gets The Nod: President Biden Acknowledges The Existence Of His Fifth Granddaughter SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend