LEGAL Extreme’ rent control could be coming to California soon - Sacramento Bee

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Well this is going to get "interesting"...

For links and interactive graphs see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article197489354.html

CAPITOL ALERT

‘Extreme’ rent control could be coming to California soon

BY ANGELA HART
ahart@sacbee.com
My feed
January 31, 2018 12:01 AM
Updated 1 hour 40 minutes ago

A costly and potentially bruising campaign is taking shape over rent control in California, with deep-pocketed Los Angeles activist Michael Weinstein bankrolling a proposed November ballot initiative to repeal a state law that sets tight limits on the type of housing covered under local rent control laws.

“Nobody’s fighting for the tenant,” said Weinstein, president of AIDS Healthcare Foundation, who partly funded the Proposition 61, the 2016 fight over prescription drug costs that became the most expensive initiative that year, with total spending at roughly $130 million.

As California confronts a historic housing crisis, low- and middle-income renters are being pushed out, even in cities with some form of rent control.

The disruption is fueling the push by Weinstein and other tenants rights’ activists to overturn a state law that prevents cities and counties from adopting strong rent control laws.

Proponents say they have been met with enthusiasm this year while gathering signatures for a proposed November ballot initiative that would repeal the 1995 Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which says rent control cannot apply to large amounts of housing, including all housing built after 1995, single-family homes, condos and duplexes. If the proposed initiative is successful, efforts by local communities to strengthen existing rent control ordinances and pass new laws could drastically alter the housing market across California.

“People are excited,” said Anya Svanoe, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, also behind the campaign. “This is the easiest signature-gathering we’ve ever done. It’s telling ... People are hungry for rent control and ... to see solutions to the housing crisis that can provide immediate relief to themselves and their neighbors.”

Video

Critics, including the California Apartment Association, believe repeal would lead to “extreme versions” of rent control throughout the state, bringing new housing construction to a standstill.

“It’s a disincentive for the construction of new, multifamily housing,” said Tom Bannon, CEO for the apartment association, a group representing landlords, investors and developers. His argument – that rent control deters new construction because it limits profit and financing options – is backed by other powerful real estate interests and construction trades groups in Sacramento, including the California Chamber of Commerce and the California Building Industry Association.

Supporters, on the street for just two weeks, have collected 100,000 signatures. They need 365,880 valid signatures by June to qualify for the November ballot. If the current law is repealed, any city or county in California could require rent control on any type of housing it chooses.

The campaign, with real estate interests on one side and tenants’ rights activists on the other, could become the most expensive initiative this November.

“Money wise, this could be the grand poobah of them all because of what’s at stake,” said Steve Maviglio, a Sacramento-based Democratic political consultant. “On one side you have a multimillionaire fighting for rent control, and the (California) Apartment Association on the other ... both sides have deep pockets, so it could be a very expensive battle. The question is whether it will overshadow other issues on the ballot designed to help housing.”

More housing needed in state

Housing is a top concern among the state’s electorate. More than half of California voters say the state’s housing affordability crisis is so bad that they’ve considered moving, and 60 percent of likely voters support rent control, according to a statewide poll last fall. Both sides of the rent control battle have also poured money into ballot box fights in recent years.

There is widespread agreement, among Democrats and Republicans and between pro-growth activists and those concerned about tenant displacement, that California must build more housing to address its affordability problems. The state needs about 200,000 housing units per year to keep pace with rising demand, though it is building an average of roughly 80,000 units per year.

Rents in California, the most expensive in the nation, have gone up more than 40 percent in major metropolitan areas since 2015, according to a January housing analysis by the Public Policy Institute of California. Median rents for all types of rental housing range from $1,595 in Sacramento, to $4,395 in San Francisco, to $2,933 in Los Angeles, according to the real estate listing service Zillow.

Nearly half of Californians – 47 percent – say the state’s high housing costs are a financial strain on themselves and their families, according to the Public Policy Institute analysis. That figure is higher among renters, with 61 percent saying they are financially burdened.

Backers of the Costa-Hawkins repeal say building the housing California needs will take decades, and tenants facing big rent increases need help now.

“There’s no building our way out of this crisis,” said Damien Goodmon, director of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s “Housing is a Human Right” campaign. “We have no illusion ... that this will be costly and ugly.”

The state Chamber of Commerce labeled a bill that also sought to repeal Costa-Hawkins a “job killer.” It died earlier this year in the Assembly, setting up the ballot box fight.

“I expect it to qualify,” said Allan Zaremberg, the Chamber’s president and CEO. “We’re concerned about increases in the cost of housing and being able to keep people in California. The consequences of a strong economy and an inability to keep up with the demand for housing is a problem we need to solve, but we believe that rent control diminishes investment in housing opportunities.

“It costs more money to build (in California),” Zaremberg said. “If you can’t recover those costs, you’re less likely to put your money into a development.”

Jeff Pemstein, a board member for the state Building Industry Association, acknowledged that economically thriving cities like San Francisco, which has rent control, have experienced a building boom, but he argued developers in other markets, like Sacramento, cannot absorb the high costs of construction, labor and permitting on top of rent control.

“People will pay astronomical prices to live in niche markets like San Francisco. They are super desirable so you can afford to put up with a lot of inconvenience, but the vast majority of California cannot afford to do that,” said Pemstein, also division president for Towne Development of Sacramento, which finances all types of development including rental housing and single-family homes.

Financial backer blames Legislature
Weinstein, behind two unsuccessful 2016 ballot initiatives that sought to require condoms in porn production and to cap state prescription drug costs to the lowest price paid by the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs, said he’d prefer the Legislature to take up repeal, but that doesn’t appear likely.

He said he’s financing the proposed initiative because he has witnessed firsthand what he perceives as consequences of the state’s housing problems.

“We’re seeing a growing homelessness crisis, our employees have to travel farther and farther to work and people are being displaced by the thousands,” Weinstein said. “Everything the Legislature is doing is geared toward creating luxury housing, not preserving the housing stock for people who are low- and moderate-income.”

He said local communities ought to be able to address the issue themselves.

“The fundamental question here isn’t even the merits of rent control. The real question is why shouldn’t cities be deciding this?” Weinstein said. “Why is the Legislature taking away all the authority over land use from cities?”

Weinstein declined to say how much money he is prepared to spend, but it would likely be millions. Through his campaign committee, Weinstein spent more than $18 million on his drug pricing initiative – the most expensive in 2016 – and more than $3 million on the condoms measure.

The apartment association is prepared to spend tens of millions, Bannon said.

“If Mr. Weinstein spends $10 to $20 million, we would have to spend at least that much,” Bannon said. “If he spends $40 million, we’d have to spend $40 million.”

Backlash over high housing costs has spurred local rent control campaigns across the state over the past three years. The apartment association has spent about $1.5 million to beat back local campaigns that sought to impose rent control on multifamily apartment complexes built before 1995, proposed through local ballot measures or city councils. Its attempts to defeat rent control have failed in some areas, with Richmond voters in 2016 passing a rent control ordinance that limits how much landlords are allowed to raise rents to 3 percent annually. It has succeeded in other parts of the Bay Area, including Santa Rosa, where a 2017 proposal failed with 52.5 percent of voters opposed.

Meanwhile, local rent control campaigns are budding this year in Sacramento, Santa Cruz, Long Beach, Inglewood and Pasadena. Repealing Costa-Hawkins would allow them to cover more units in local ordinances, if they so choose.

Assemblyman David Chiu, D-San Francisco, who served as president of the city’s Board of Supervisors for six years before being elected to state office, said cities with existing laws, like San Francisco, could benefit from repeal.

“While not perfect, rent control has been one of the very few policies that has protected some level of economic diversity in San Francisco,” Chiu said. “If rent control disappeared tomorrow, our city would only be affordable to those who make six-figure incomes. It has worked in San Francisco and elsewhere ... Cities are crying out for relief.”

Angela Hart: 916-326-5528, @ahartreports

RELATED STORIES FROM SACRAMENTO BEE

Final tally: Nearly 43,000 apply for Sacramento’s subsidized housing waiting list

This Sacramento suburb is seeing huge rent increases

Unsure about rent control? Here’s another way to protect California tenants

Home sales cool in December. Prices? Not so much
 

mzkitty

I give up.
Too crazy for me. I remember when I lived in LA in the mid-70s, I had a little bungalow off Western Avenue near Santa Monica Blvd that was only $130 a month to rent. Furnished. My landlord was weird, but oh well. At least he gave me my security deposit back when I moved. I knew a woman in real estate at that time and she used to get all excited about selling real mansions in Beverly Hills for $750,000. That was a lot of money back then. How times have changed. Who would want to live in CA now? Where are they going to build more houses, in the already ravaged burn areas?
 

West

Senior
In order to build residential or anything in Cali, first thing you need to have (after engineered and specked plans) is energy calcs done, for multi family you also may now need electrical load calcs done. That alone isn't to bad, adds about $.25 cents per foot of new home. Whats bad about it, is that in order to comply and pass the calcs it has to be super efficient. So much so that it often doubles the cost to build their compared to building in other states where only standerds are used

Of course rents are going to be high when the cost to build in Cal. is double and triple BECAUSE of state mandated controls, labor, fees, and compliances, than in other states who just have standerds.

Their so stupid they can't see the forest behind the trees. Although they should, now since the forest is dead or burnt.

If they got rid of the CEC and all of that stupid nonsensical buracratic BS, rents would go done. That would be much smarter.

Ata... CEC.... a buracratic nightmare for anyone building in Commiefornia.....

http://www.energy.ca.gov
 
Last edited:

mzkitty

I give up.
Wow, I just went and Google mapped that intersection and the street I used to live on. Everything I remember is just gone. The only thing left is the big old Sears store on Santa Monica. Even my street appears to be just little boxes of business-type buildings. How boring.
 

West

Senior
Wow, I just went and Google mapped that intersection and the street I used to live on. Everything I remember is just gone. The only thing left is the big old Sears store on Santa Monica. Even my street appears to be just little boxes of business-type buildings. How boring.

I would bet that in those little boxes of business- type buildings is... a tattoo shop, head/pot shop, coffee shop, grow supply shop, and a Democrat registration shop.
 

Lavender

Veteran Member
We had a house built here in California a few years ago, and cleared over $100,000 when we sold it three years later.

The housing costs in California is unbelievable. I guess that is why the government is helping the contractors (financially) build more and more low income housing (aka farm worker housing).
 

mzkitty

I give up.
I would bet that in those little boxes of business- type buildings is... a tattoo shop, head/pot shop, coffee shop, grow supply shop, and a Democrat registration shop.


I couldn't tell, but you're probably right. It looks like they even tore down the old 4-story hotel diagonally across from Sears that I stayed in briefly. Now how could they do that? The place was famous as the hotel Lenny Bruce used to stay at. But on the other hand, all the millions of roaches that lived there had to move.

:lol:
 

West

Senior
We had a house built here in California a few years ago, and cleared over $100,000 when we sold it three years later.

The housing costs in California is unbelievable. I guess that is why the government is helping the contractors (financially) build more and more low income housing (aka farm worker housing).

Only $100k? Hopefully that lasted you and yours for more than a year. And or you was able to invest it, and make even more.

Would you try it again?
 

Lavender

Veteran Member
Only $100k? Hopefully that lasted you and yours for more than a year. And or you was able to invest it, and make even more.

Would you try it again?
Yes, we were able to invest it.

I am not sure if we would have another house built again. Takes a lot of planning and time just to get it all going. And finding a good contractor is not always easy.

We will be selling our present home when we move out of California (Lord willing). Right now, we are thinking we will probably buy a house that is already built and will most likely need to do some remodeling.
 

West

Senior
Yes, we were able to invest it.

I am not sure if we would have another house built again. Takes a lot of planning and time just to get it all going. And finding a good contractor is not always easy.

We will be selling our present home when we move out of California (Lord willing). Right now, we are thinking we will probably buy a house that is already built and will most likely need to do some remodeling.

Just saw a small 5 acre homestead listed in our AO... small house, sewer, power, well, barn, carport and treed property for only $55k.
 

Trivium Pursuit

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Of course rents are going to be high when the cost to build in Cal. is double and triple BECAUSE of state mandated controls, labor, fees, and compliances, than in other states who just have standerds.

Sounds like a snake eating its own tail.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
see, now they just need a follow-up law mandating developers build housing at a loss

Better yet - acknowledge in law that everyone is ENTITLED to a place of residence - and cut up those Beverly Hills houses to locate more proletariat.

"Dr. Zhivago" comes to mind.


Dobbin
 

Vtshooter

Veteran Member
I can't comment on the cost of housing in Ca, but maybe they wouldn't be having so much of a shortage of housing, if they would shut off the flow of illegals. For God's sake, they allow foreigners to pour into the state, then cry about no housing. Insanity.
 

Bardou

Veteran Member
Too crazy for me. I remember when I lived in LA in the mid-70s, I had a little bungalow off Western Avenue near Santa Monica Blvd that was only $130 a month to rent. Furnished. My landlord was weird, but oh well. At least he gave me my security deposit back when I moved. I knew a woman in real estate at that time and she used to get all excited about selling real mansions in Beverly Hills for $750,000. That was a lot of money back then. How times have changed. Who would want to live in CA now? Where are they going to build more houses, in the already ravaged burn areas?

For those of us who own our homes and not selling, we do not care about rent control. Most of the rental areas are shit holes and does not command high renters, because most are Section 8, paid for by the taxpayer. Section 8 has been controlling rent for years, and they also pay for repairs. When free stuff is given away, we all know what happens.
 

dstraito

TB Fanatic
Sounds like Commiefornia is almost to its goal of being a communist state.

Landlords will burst that housing bubble trying to sell before the prices start dropping and they get locked in to a low rent that would not even cover a mortgage.
 

ainitfunny

Saved, to glorify God.
Does California expect to have severe rent controls AND continue to collect high property tax?
You can’t have both!

If they TRY they will see a housing shortage immediately change to a housing CRISIS and rioting as landlords proceed to ASAP evict tenants and SELL rental properties or turn them into commercial, retail, or office space.
 

20Gauge

TB Fanatic
Does California expect to have severe rent controls AND continue to collect high property tax?
You can’t have both!

If they TRY they will see a housing shortage immediately change to a housing CRISIS and rioting as landlords proceed to ASAP evict tenants and SELL rental properties or turn them into commercial, retail, or office space.


STOP Just STOP! You are using logic. That doesn't apply when speaking of California. You know very well the two are not related. Higher property taxes will be collected and the rent controlled. Anything less will be unacceptable......
 

Chance

Veteran Member
California Liberal's way of getting rid of their rift raft - so these 'low-end', welfare recipient Liberals (illegal immigrants and others) will infiltrate other states and infect their state governments.
 

ainitfunny

Saved, to glorify God.
STOP Just STOP! You are using logic. That doesn't apply when speaking of California. You know very well the two are not related. Higher property taxes will be collected and the rent controlled. Anything less will be unacceptable......
mea culpa.
But well, what did you expect from a “deplorable”, we are still infected with reason.
 
Top