The Danger of Leah Simon-Weisberg's Extreme Housing Agenda

For the past several years, rental housing providers in the Bay Area have faced a growing threat: Leah Simon-Weisberg, a tenant lobbyist and attorney from Berkeley, CA. With a socialized housing mission, Simon-Weisberg wants to implement stringent rent control measures and housing policy across the Bay Area. Her influence poses a significant danger to the rental housing market and the livelihoods of small housing providers, which she admittedly wants to put out of business. Consider this a warning regarding the potential consequences of her advocacy, and the historical horrors associated with her extreme rent control, Just Cause, and TOPA (Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act) provisions to advance her socialized housing agenda.

Simon-Weisberg holds the position of Legal Director for the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE), which is a reincarnation of the defunct organization ACORN. ACORN disbanded in 2010 due to egregious impropriety and misuse of funds. ACORN leadership, including Simon-Weisberg, formed several new nonprofit organizations like ACCE. Today, Simon-Weisberg promotes her services as a “self-proclaimed expert” on rental housing, rent control, landlord-tenant law, and anti-displacement policy. Her advocacy has extended to high-profile cases, including representing Moms 4 Housing in their fight for “Housing as a Human Right”.

While Simon-Weisberg's commitment to her beliefs is evident, her approach raises dire concerns. She is inserting herself into cities across the Bay Area and rolls out harmful and complex housing policy that she writes for legislators, authoring language for Rent Control and Just Cause ordinances. Policymakers, who may not be well-versed in the complexities or consequences of housing regulations, may quickly adopt the provisions without proper scrutiny. Given her explicit goal to "put private housing providers out of business," questions should arise about her intentions and the potential biases that drive her agenda.

One of the key concerns surrounding Leah Simon-Weisberg is her lack of experience as a rental property owner or property manager. Her advocacy for extreme rent control measures, without a firsthand understanding of the challenges faced by small housing providers, raises serious doubts about the feasibility and fairness of her proposals. Bringing all key stakeholders together with varied perspectives when crafting complex housing policy is critical. Legislators should carefully consider the expertise and motivations of those shaping housing policies that can have negative and far-reaching consequences for decades

Simon-Weisberg's push for extreme rent control measures and untested housing policy is reminiscent of historic experiments with social and public housing, which have often resulted in disastrous outcomes in US cities across. The implementation of such policies can lead to a decline in the quality of rental housing, decreased investment in property maintenance, community blight, and a reduction in the overall supply of affordable housing. The negative impact on both renters and providers is evident in various case studies. Regardless of the negative outcomes, opposing data, and historical failures, Simon-Weisberg continues to push forward her housing agenda.  She has openly stated that her tombstone should read “She Brought Rent Control to the Bay Area”.    

Leah Simon-Weisberg played a crucial role in drafting the rent control ordinance for Richmond, California, which was passed in November 2016. Unfortunately, the aftermath has been nothing short of a disaster for the city's rental housing community. The new regulations have led to high rents, a decline in property maintenance, a reduction in the number of available rental units, and an overall deterioration in the quality of housing. This serves as a cautionary tale for other cities considering similar extreme measures. Do you want your city to be next?

Simon-Weisberg's efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic included instilling fear of more homelessness and convincing elected officials to pass more stringent local eviction moratoriums with no renter proof of impact that also superseded state-wide moratoriums. This may have seemed necessary in the early stages of the pandemic. However, after three long years of this blanket policy with no requirement for renters to provide COVID-related hardship, this led to hundreds of millions of dollars in lost rental income for housing providers and rent debt owed by households across the East Bay. Because of the protracted moratoriums, there is an enormous backlog of eviction filings in our courts today. Her approach shows a complete disregard for equity or fairness in the rental housing community and should raise concerns about the long-term impact and sustainability of anything she advises. Her moves to permanently ban evictions due to the inability to pay rent accrued during the pandemic has had lasting consequences on essential rental housing, discouraging investment in rental properties, and ultimately exacerbating housing shortages in the future. Ultimately, this hurts renters in the long run. 

A question that all housing stakeholders should ask is what does Simon-Weisberg get out of this beyond just advancing her social agenda, devaluing the property of small owners/operators, and forcing housing providers out of business? The more insidious side of the plan introduces such complexity and confusion in housing legislation that only attorneys can resolve these disputes.  Cities and counties funnel tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer money to nonprofit tenant attorney organizations to resolve renter-owner disputes. If you can manufacture more legal disputes, these organizations will receive more public funding. Simon-Weisberg also advises and serves nonprofits like Centro Legal de la Raza, Eviction Defense Center, and other legal defense groups. 

Complaints have been engaged to expose self-dealing lobbyists who write housing legislation that drive more cases against property owners. This is part of a systematic scheme to kill these small businesses, extort money from under-resourced rental property owners, and create buying opportunities for municipalities and nonprofits (backed by well-funded investors). 

Rental housing providers in the Bay Area must be vigilant and informed about the dangers posed by Leah Simon-Weisberg's extreme housing agenda. Her lack of experience as a rental housing provider and disdain for the industry creates an obvious bias in her proposals and raises serious concerns about the cities she’s advising and the renters she purports to help. Local city councils should carefully vet any legislation presented by Simon-Weisberg with experienced Rental Housing Providers and other subject matter experts. It’s critical that legislators ignore the prospect of immediate gratification when passing shortsighted and short-term laws that Simon-Weisberg hands them and actually look at the long-term consequences of implementing these measures.  What problem are we attempting to solve should be a critical question, and using data and other research findings to develop good policy is critical. Policymakers must think holistically and consider alternative solutions that address the needs of renters, housing providers, homeowners, and local businesses without injuring relationships and jeopardizing the stability of the housing market. Convincing legislators to ignore dogmatic and extremely biased influencers like Leah Simon-Weisberg is the first step.

This article was featured in the March 2024 Rentrospect.  Chris Tipton is the Marketing & Communication Manager for EBRHA.