Raft of Rules for Group’s Santa Cruz Apartments

More: News, John Stewart Company, smoking
By Curtis Cartier Wed, Aug 12, 2009

Mission Gardens Apartments resident Tania Story says the complex's rules go to far. Photo by Curtis Cartier.

What do ball games, bathrobes, squirt guns, skateboards, dirty clothes, smoking, hanging laundry, bare feet, pajamas, barbecues and video cameras all have in common? They’re all soon to be prohibited in some way from common areas at the Mission Gardens Apartments in Santa Cruz.

Beginning Sept. 1, the Westside apartment complex will join more than 40 other properties supervised by Bay Area management firm the John Stewart Company in mandating what some argue are unreasonable amounts of rules and regulations for its tenants to live by. Out of the 14-page, 85-rule tome of directives recently delivered to Mission Gardens residents, some, like an indoor and outdoor smoking ban, have supporters and opponents arguing passionately on both sides. But others, like a rule against children playing with balls, or another requiring that all clothes worn in common areas be clean, have few fans. Some of them may, in fact, be illegal.

“There seems to be this trend by apartment complexes, especially by the John Stewart Company, toward imposing a lot of different rules on peoples’ conduct,” says Gretchen Regenhardt, an attorney with California Rural Legal Assistance. “I’m not sure what the point is, other than to have an extreme amount of control over the people that live there. And when it comes to rules like kids not being allowed to play with balls, we’re of the opinion that that’s discriminatory against people with children, and it’s against the law.”

The scene at Mission Gardens is tense. In one corner of the root beer-and- chocolate-colored, two-story complex, kids ride plastic bikes around the parking lot while parents like Marjorie Jackson and Craig Akey smoke near the sidewalks and watch. A feud over smoking has pitted these neighbors and others against another pair of tenants in an angry, and at times childish, quarrel over who has the right to smoke and where. Yet both sides seem to agree that some of the new rules are senseless, and both say they’re willing to pay a lawyer to help them prove their point.

“I have severe asthma, glaucoma and sleep apnea, and secondhand smoke coming through the vents and windows has caused me to have to wear a gas mask in my own home. Banning smoking is something they have to do, or I could actually die,” says Pat Colby, who has been actively involved in getting management to ban smoking. “But some of the rules are just overboard. They don’t care about the health of the residents, it’s about the money.”

“The money,” as Colby and many neighbors believe, is insurance money. Apartment complexes can get major discounts for banning things like barbecues on balconies. Yet Dave Miller, a local insurance agent with Battistini & Canfield, says that besides prohibiting barbecues, specific rules don’t carry as much weight as the overall appearance of the complex when it comes to insurance breaks. Concern over that appearance may be behind the requirements that tenants be clean-clothed and their balconies laundry-free.

Managers at the John Stewart Company are evasive when questioned about the reasons for and the legality of their rules. The only comments from the company come from Regional Manager Keri Swenson, who claims that Mission Gardens and other JSCO properties merely enforce guidelines handed down by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Yet officials at HUD deny that the department has any power to make such rules and that the landlord is solely responsible for establishing a code of conduct.

“HUD does not publish house rules. Any conduct rules are made between the property owner and the tenants,” says Ken Cole, executive director of Housing Authority of the County of Santa Cruz. “Blaming the government is a popular option for people, and I’m not surprised someone would want to blame us.”

Some argue that tenants who don’t like the rules should simply move someplace else. Picking an apartment, however, is not as simple as choosing a restaurant or a pair of shoes. Rules are usually disclosed during lease-signing and seldom become a make-or-break point in what, by that time, has typically been an exhausting process. Not to mention that folks like Colby, who are receiving Housing Choice Vouchers from HUD—commonly known as Section 8 vouchers—have to go through other steps to qualify to transfer to a new residence.

Robin Gysin, a coordinator with Santa Cruz County Consumer Affairs, specializes in landlord and tenant issues. She occupies the middle ground between tenants and landlords and says both, at the end of the day, are just protecting their bottom line.

“I think from the management point of view, they think they’re just being careful, and from the residents’ point of view, they think they don’t have any freedoms,” says Gysin. “I get calls from residents saying, ‘My kid can’t play outside,’ and I get calls from landlords who are worried about safety. Essentially, if it’s not illegal, a private landlord can establish almost any rule. But if there are questions whether the rules are legal, tenants can certainly pursue that in court.”

Comments (15)

Post a comment

hockiepockie Sat, Sep 12, 2009 - 5:47 pm

Look what smoke does to your looks, if this isn’t reason enough not to smoke.

This woman is only 49 but looks 69.

Don’t smoke!
If you do quit now!

Living proof, yuck

cat's meow Thu, Sep 17, 2009 - 10:32 pm

wow! i read about this.  it’s called “smoker’s face”:

http://www.buttitout.com/quit_smoking_beauty_tips.htm

hockiepockie Thu, Sep 17, 2009 - 10:52 pm

Does this look familiar? Found this in a search of “smoker’s face. This photo and the photo above look related.

“http://www.chantixsite.com/images/smokers-face.jpg

meforjohnstewart Tue, Sep 29, 2009 - 10:24 pm

If people don’t like the rules that Mr. Stewart places in afforable housing MOVE or follow the rules.

cat's meow Wed, Sep 30, 2009 - 4:42 pm

You must be a homeowner.  If mr. stewart placed these rules on you, I would place a bet you would not be so agreeable.

hockiepockie Fri, Oct 02, 2009 - 12:58 pm

I would place a bet the outrageous rules were enacted because of a handful of misbehaving tenants. Such   as the lazy non-working, meth-head, alcoholics—addicts— that don’t deserve to be there.

The supreme court has zero tolerance for drug users, drug dealers, and meth cookers. Subsidized housing wasn’t meant for them. Why are they here?

Mr. Stewart needs to do his job and get rid of them. Then they wouldn’t have to make all the crazy rules, because normal responsible people would live there not the chain-smoking, meth-head, alcoholic, addicts who are making the biggest fuss.

If it wasn’t for the likes (addict) pictured above there wouldn’t be a need for outrageous house rules. Clean up or get out!!!

Lets get some real deserving renters in there.

Taxpayers don’t need to subsidize addicts like —meth-heads and alcoholics!

Mark Tue, Feb 02, 2010 - 11:34 pm

Heil Hitler!?

Why object?  OBEY OBEY OBEY

Be a good citizen and report your neighbors!  You might win a pie.

Simply because something is wrong is apparently no reason to do something about it: this is called wrong-tolerance.

hockiepockie Mon, Nov 23, 2009 - 8:03 pm

Why won’t the city of Santa Cruz nor the Police Dept shut down the (suspected haha) meth done by the woman in the picture boyfriend.

What are they getting a cut of the sales?

The police say they are aware of the situation, so is the drug task force.

What are they waiting a fire and explosion? Causalities?

just say no to drugs! Sat, Dec 05, 2009 - 4:17 am

Is meth cooking a crime?

Why wouldn’t the police not arrest people running a meth lab or your landlord shut it down in your apt complex?

You aren’t managed by the the John Stewart Company are you?

MrTidker Sat, Dec 05, 2009 - 2:01 pm

Smokers should smoke out of apartments and have respect for others. Its not a nice thing to breath their smoke when you are allergic or are trying to sleep, eat of study. I live in an apartment building where a resident smokes all the time and stinks up my apartment, I probably pay more rent than this person and he/she should respect my right.

Mark Tue, Feb 02, 2010 - 11:36 pm

If they grasped either honor or respect they wouldn’t be smoking: they would respect their own body.

They would not be egotistical sociopaths, as is the trend engineered by state schools, but would have compassion from LOVE for others.  Charity is what we need but by definition it CANNOT be state mandated.

pat c Sun, Dec 06, 2009 - 8:37 pm

MrTidker…I have the same problem, but my problem isn’t the stink it is the fact the second-hand smoke is killing me. I have no heat during the winter. I am freezing right now which isn’t helping my asthma. I could die from the SHS.

I have repetitively asked the John Stewart Company for an accommodation, even an immediate one. All the way back in December 08. They said they would do something to help me. Still waiting and getting sicker and sicker. They have violated ADA and denied me accommodation over and over.

I probably pay more rent too. I couldn’t open my windows during the hot spells because every time I did SHS came in. The SHS also comes in my front door because it accumulates on my porch and when the front door is used it floods in.

JSCO hasn’t done a thing to help the problem by ignoring my pleas over and over. They have even gone as far as to say there is no problem when everyone else can smell it.

Anyone have any suggestions on how to make the agents for the landlord or the landlord fix the problem because the city council won’t.

At times it is so bad I think I again need to resort to wearing a gas mask just to be in my apt.

Mark Tue, Feb 02, 2010 - 11:32 pm

Much like crack, once you start fascism a little is never enough.

Mark Tue, Feb 02, 2010 - 11:39 pm

Self evidently

“All the way back in December 08”

your problem is not as severe as you have deluded yourself to believe: you are not dead.

STOP WHINING.  YOU do something to help yourself: this is the American way.

just say no to drugs! Thu, Feb 18, 2010 - 12:15 am

Mark, you must be one of those “crazy smokers” the ones that give all smokers a bad rep.
I think Pat C should sue the hell out of the management company and the smoker! That will take care of the problem and it is the American Way.

Post a comment

Submit the word you see below:


Cancel