Some say rent control is necessary, while others say it will hurt the economy and stifle housing construction.
As Presidential candidate Kamala Harris has repeatedly talked about the high cost of housing on the campaign trail, and residents in the Berkeley neighborhood where she grew up offered mixed views on a California ballot initiative, Proposition 33, which would allow local governments to impose rent control.
Diane Soline, 53, a tenant who said she has long worried about the cost of housing, said: “It would secure housing for those who need it most. And I think it’s a humane way to combat this horrible thing that we’re going through — the homelessness and housing crisis.”
One of her neighbors, Bryan Burk, 80, disagreed. Burk, who owns his home, said he doesn’t think local governments should have the right to impose rent control.
“I think the property owners, they know what’s going on with their property and they can do what they want with it,” said Burk. “People don’t have to rent it if they think it’s too much.”
The disagreement among neighbors mirrors clashes that have been playing out across the state, particularly among Democrats, over the measure and what is the best way to address California’s astronomically high rents and shortage of housing.
Even some proponents of limitations on rental increases say Proposition 33 is not the best way to achieve them. That’s because the measure would not actually limit rent–it would merely allow cities to do so if they chose. But some cities could put in place rent restrictions that were so severe, some policy advocates said, that it would actually stifle the thing the state needs most, which is more construction of all kinds of housing.
This is not the first time rent control has been on the California ballot. In fact, similar ballot measures were rejected by voters in 2018 and 2020.
Although California currently has a statewide rent cap which limits annual rent increases to 5% plus local inflation, or 10%, whichever is lower, local governments are not allowed to impose rent control for residential rental units and single-family homes.
The Costa-Hawkins Act, approved by voters in 1995, prohibits local governments from imposing rent control laws on single-family homes or apartments built after Feb 1 of that year.
Proponents for Prop. 33 argue that rent is still too high even with the statewide rent cap.
Larry Rosenthal, a public policy professor at UC Berkeley, said that getting housing built in California is complicated. It requires both political approvals and economic investment. A blunt policy directive such as Proposition 33, without mandates for investment in housing, could stifle development.
Renter-friendly cities such as San Francisco or Santa Cruz would be free to impose strong rent controls without making any counterbalancing investment to boost the housing supply if they choose to do so. And that could mean nothing gets built, and things get even worse for renters.
Both sides are spending heavily on the measure. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a Los Angeles nonprofit that is backing the measure, has contributed almost $42 million in support. Opponents, including the California Apartment Association and the California Association of Realtors, have raised over $90 million.