WEATHER »

Realtors Oppose Gang Injunction

Councilmember Gregg Hart Also Argues Against It


Thursday, February 27, 2014
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Share Article

The Santa Barbara Association of Realtors Board of Directors voted to oppose the City of Santa Barbara’s proposed gang injunction because of “the stigma” the injunction would place on large portions of the city designated as “safety zones.” Board president Ed Fuller said real estate agents would feel compelled to disclose if properties fall within the safety zones ​— ​which compose about 30 percent of the city’s land mass ​— ​and that could have a deleterious effect on sales. “Whether it’s a deep freeze or a light frost, I believe it will have an impact,” Fuller said. “It will not be positive in the short run.”

Fuller said the vote came after Councilmember Gregg Hart ​— ​who campaigned against the injunction ​— ​made a presentation to the board. Fuller described Hart’s pitch as “factual” and acknowledged that the realtors did not seek out a rebuttal presentation by injunction supporters. Fuller said the Realtors support anything that reduces crime but added that the police have other tools at their disposal to deal with gang violence. He took particular exception with a “special events provision” that would expand the scope of the protected zones to include much of Shoreline Park and the Mesa during such events as Fiesta and the Fourth of July. “The real estate business is not all about location, location, location,” Fuller said. “It’s about disclosure, disclosure, disclosure.”

Assistant City Attorney Tom Shapiro ​— ​who will argue the city’s position in court later this spring ​— ​dismissed the Association of Realtors’ concerns, saying they had “no credence.” Similar issues were raised when Oakland passed its gang injunction, he said, but were not borne out by the facts. He added there was no law or requirement mandating such disclosures. Councilmember Frank Hotchkiss, a real estate agent and ardent supporter of the gang injunction, has argued that such disclosures might prove advantageous in selling properties in certain neighborhoods. He expressed surprise at the Realtors’ vote, noting that all the City Council candidates the board endorsed in last November’s election supported the injunction.

Politically, the vote was a coup for Hart, now entering his second month in office, and marks a striking strategic expansion of the campaign against the injunction. To date, the loudest critics of the proposal have been Latino activists and civil libertarians. While they have also argued the injunction would hurt real estate sales and the area’s tourist industry, they have not gained much traction with either camp. Hart ​— ​one of only two votes against the injunction on the council ​— ​is the first to actively woo either business group. Legally, however, the vote will have no bearing on the outcome of the seven-day trial scheduled to begin May 5.

Comments

Independent Discussion Guidelines

So, one of the loudest advocates for the proposed injunction admits that realtors must disclose it:

"Councilmember Frank Hotchkiss, a real estate agent and ardent supporter of the gang injunction, has argued that such disclosures might prove advantageous in selling properties in certain neighborhoods."

John_Adams (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 7:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It's not the injunction creating stigma.
It's the type of sellers and buyers a minority related injunction attracts.
Just look at whose supporting this expensive debacle. The flippers... The Mayor and the Chief. RINO councilpersons slash business owners Rowse and Hotchkiss.... Montecito....ect.

touristunfriendly (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow, talk about priorities. What is most important.. what a bunch or realtors say or what the cops say? I am not a huge cop fan but when it comes to the safety of my kid and the future of my community I will stick with the cops. Maybe the realtors should think about their own stigma which pretty much stinks in this town.

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 10:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"the Realtors support anything that reduces crime"

HA that's funny it's more like the Realtors support anything that increases their commission, lets be honest.

yendopostal (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Realtors, the new allies of gangs. Who would've thunk?

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with yendopostal, Follow the Money!

dou4now (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 11:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yay SB Assoc of Realtors and Ed Fulton!

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 11:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have always regarded the injunction as a way of fighting the OG's from recruiting the younger set that feel they have no choice but to take part.

its said fear and greed are a salespersons best tools. i'm sure greg hart had the board breathless and in tears by the time he was done talking.

sack up and think about the real reasons why an injunction should be used here.

lawdy (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 11:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

In the long run the injunction will create a divide between gang areas and non-gang areas. Which in my opinion is bad for everyone.

This will actually give gangs the supposed territory they want for selling drugs and having a false sense of power and respect.

Dealing with youth job opportunities and transitioning from probation to jobs will be more successful in reducing violence. Gang-bangers currently derive their identity from being "in the system" and on "probation". Look at the data for how many juveniles violate their probation during their last week of probation so they can stay in the system to keep their reputation.

Georgy (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 1:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

In the long run, I see it as more that the older knuckleheads on the DREAM TEAM will start paying the price for being themselves and not be able run around being "cool" in the eyes of the youth so that they can lure them in. By being cool I mean running drugs, being bullies, etc... because hopefully they will be in the pokey! How is it our responsibility to fix all of these so called social injustices? What happened to personal responsibility for ones actions? Get a job, work hard, and obey the law like everyone else has to.

Regarding the realtor vermin: yeah, they don't support the gang injunction, but many of them, including SB Indy's realtor of the year support and love foreclosures so they can make money off of many a families financial misfortunes in this town. The transparency is blinding.

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Bimbotestkie: "Regarding the realtor vermin: Yeah, they don't support the gang injunction, but many of them, including SB Indy's realtor of the year support and love foreclosures so they can make money off of many a families financial misfortunes in this town. The transparency is blinding."

Dude, I think you're on to something!

blahblahmoreblah (anonymous profile)
February 27, 2014 at 4:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am liking Frank Hotchkiss more and more by the minute. The "association" ought to be ashamed of itself. I know so others who are very nice people so a full lump job is not appropriate.

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
February 28, 2014 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Add realtors to the gang injunction since they can be considered gang associates now.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
March 1, 2014 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: