Housing advocate denies making rent control deal. Text messages tell different story

“If I get fired over this deal, please say nice things about me when I apply for a job with the city lol.”

Sacramento housing advocate Michelle Pariset texted this to a City Council aide on June 11.

She no longer needs to worry about positive reviews at City Hall. Pariset is at the center of controversy for her role in making – then breaking – a highly-publicized deal with the Sacramento City Council.

Pariset is one of three Sacramento rent control proponents who put their names on a ballot measure they threatened to pursue in 2020 unless the council took action on the issue. In August, the council passed a compromise measure, the Sacramento Tenant Protection and Relief Act.

The other two proponents who signed the ballot measure, Margarita Maldonado and Omega Brewer, kept their promises and withdrew. Pariset reneged and is pushing ahead with the measure.

We criticized Pariset’s reversal in a Nov. 8 editorial, calling on her to “do the right thing by keeping her word and removing the measure from the 2020 ballot.” We called out Pariset because her decision to backtrack on such a high profile agreement erodes civic trust and harms the tenants’ rights movement.

In response, the nonprofit law firm where Pariset works – Public Advocates – called for a full retraction of our editorial.

“Neither Public Advocates nor its staff have ever agreed to retract the rent control ballot initiative in exchange for the anti-rent gouging ordinance,” said the organization in a statement.

Pariset’s text messages to City Councilman Steve Hansen and his chief of staff tell a different story.

Texts obtained by The Sacramento Bee show that Pariset openly negotiated an agreement and supported withdrawing the ballot measure. In one disturbing exchange, she even asked a council aide for advice on how to evade the California Public Records Act.

Texts between Hansen and Pariset began in January when the two arranged a lunch meeting at La Bonne Soupe to discuss rent control. By June 11, Pariset was openly discussing a “deal” with Hansen’s chief of staff, Matt Read, and worrying that it might get her “fired.”

The next day, June 12, Pariset texted Read again.

“G’morning!” Pariset wrote. “Our coalition is voting today about the deal on the table … I’ll need to tell folks if there’s a deal to be made in spite of not being able to pull the initiative (at least til January 1, if Sterns Bill passes, assuming that actually covers charter amendments).”

“It can be withdrawn. That’s the plan,” replied Read later in the day. “Offer is good according to that plan.”

The “Sterns” bill Pariset references, Senate Bill 681 by state Sen. Henry Stern (D-Canoga Park), allows certain measures to be withdrawn from local ballots. The city of Sacramento supported it and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed it into law.

SB 681 played a key role in the rent control compromise because it allows the city to withdraw the measure. In a July 22 text to Hansen, Pariset suggested clarifying the bill’s language to make sure it applied to the rent control measure.

“Speaking of withdrawing, Sterns bill is silent on whether or not it applies to initiatives that have already qualified,” wrote Pariset. “I saw that the city took a support position. Maybe an amendment to clarify, some intent language?”

“Not a bad idea, but as I understand it the bill is sufficient,” replied Hansen. “Would you be interested in helping with that?”

At 6:09 p.m. on Aug. 13, after the City Council voted to approve the compromise measure, Pariset sent Hansen a celebratory text:

“Well done! Thank you,” she wrote.

“Thank you too,” replied Hansen. “Now we need to close the loop on the withdrawal letter.”

Pariset declined interview requests. In a written statement, she denied making a deal. Public Advocates issued a statement saying her texts, shared here, were “cherry-picked” and “out of context.”

But the texts aren’t the only evidence. Officials at SEIU 1000 say the deal, hashed out during months of meetings and phone calls, couldn’t have happened without Pariset. When the council issued a press release announcing the deal on August 8, Pariset signed off on it, said SEIU 1000’s Margarita Maldonado.

“If the agreement is adopted by the City Council on Tuesday, Aug. 13, advocates have agreed not to pursue a rent control measure they had qualified for the 2020 ballot,” said the release.

“We always made sure we had the agreement of the three proponents about what message and direction we were going to be communicating,” said Maldonado.

Is everyone in Sacramento making up stories about Pariset’s role in the deal? Or is Pariset being dishonest?

On June 17, Pariset texted Hansen’s chief of staff:

“What email addresses should I send examples to? In the interest of keeping things out of the PRA realm.”

“Can’t,” replied Read. “We’re in it. Say hi to posterity.”

“[Hi] posterity,” texted Pariset, using the hand waving emoji in place of “hi.”

When someone at the intersection of government and policy tries to evade transparency laws, it raises troubling ethical and legal questions. Guillermo Mayer, CEO of Public Advocates, refused to comment on Pariset’s request to sidestep state law.

For posterity, let’s be clear: Pariset negotiated a deal. Her fellow negotiators say her sign-off was crucial. The City Council enacted a compromise measure. Pariset lavished praise on Mayor Darrell Steinberg and Councilman Hansen when it passed.

Then she broke her word.

We stand by our editorial and repeat our call for Pariset to keep her promise. Democracy can’t work without trust. When leaders fail to honor their agreements, the whole system breaks down.

If Pariset refuses to make good on the agreement, city leaders should spare no effort to block her discredited measure from the 2020 ballot.

This story was originally published November 19, 2019 at 2:59 AM with the headline "Housing advocate denies making rent control deal. Text messages tell different story."