A proposal to place a cap on rent hikes statewide was approved in the California Assembly late Wednesday and will now advance into the Senate—with major changes to appease a powerful group of realtors.
The Mercury News reports that “because of an 11th-hour handshake deal” with the California Association of Realtors, the rent caps proposed under Assembly Bill 1482 are now higher: 7 percent, plus the rate of inflation, which averages about 2.5 percent in California.
It was approved as lawmakers scrambled to meet a Friday deadline for bills in the California Legislature to pass in their original chambers. AB 1482 was the only tenant protection bill to survive.
Assembly Bill 1481, a “companion” bill to AB 1482 that would have made it illegal for landlords to evict tenants without “just cause,” failed to come up for a vote on Thursday. It is now dead for the year.
Referencing the demise of Senate Bill 50—which would have allowed four-and five-story apartment buildings near train stations and some bus stops in single-family neighborhoods—Los Angeles Times state politics reporter Liam Dillon called May a “blood bath” for California housing bills. The Sacramento Bee declared it a win for landlords and relators.
The rent cap bill passed the Assembly on a vote of 43-28, only after it was amended. The changes “prompted the realtors’ trade association to finally withdraw its opposition after weeks of intense negotiations,” The Mercury News reports.
Before the compromise, the bill had established a cap of 5 percent, plus inflation. Additionally, the limits now have an expiration date—of 2023—and would not apply to property owners with fewer than 10 single-family homes.
René Christian Moya, director of Los Angeles-based Housing Is A Human Right, the housing rights division of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, said the changes “watered down” the bill and give a “raw deal” to renters.
“There is a real danger that many landlords will see the rent cap as a new floor, handing tenants 10-percent rent increases year after year,” he said.
But even with the changes, other groups say the proposed legislation will protect tenants from rent gauging. Uplift Inglewood called it an “amazing step forward to protect renters.”
AB 1482 would apply to all types of rental properties, except those already subject to local rent control laws.
It would not impact renters in the cities of Santa Monica, West Hollywood, and Los Angeles, cities that already have rent control laws on the books. In the city of Los Angeles, property owners of rent-controlled buildings are right now allowed to raise rent 3 percent.
Under AB 1481, which did not come up for a vote, landlords would have been barred from evicting tenants unless they failed to pay rent or violated their lease. It would have also required landlords to give tenants the opportunity to correct any violations before issuing an eviction.
In a statement, the California Rental Housing Association, which has argued that the housing bills would have stymied production, exacerbating California’s housing crisis, said AB 1481 would have “complicated the already cumbersome eviction process.”
But the bill’s coauthor Assemblymember Tim Grayson (D-Concord) has said that protections against rent-gouging, like AB 1482, “are not enough when tenants can still be evicted without cause or due process.”
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated that the cap on rent increases on rent-controlled buildings in the city of Los Angeles is 4 percent. The cap is 3 percent until July 1, 2019, when it will increase to 4 percent.
Comments
YOU get a rent increase! And YOU get a rent increase! EVERYONE gets a rent increase!
By MonrovianSurfNutz911FAQ2Serious! on 05.30.19 9:37am
In most cases, the market won’t sustain 10% rent increases. Be realistic and look at what’s happening as a whole (not just the wild exceptions) in the market. . I’m a landlord and I’d be thrilled!!! if I could get rent increases like that.
By kcp1 on 05.30.19 5:04pm
It’s very applicable when you buy poorly managed buildings. Hell, my dad just bought one with a tenant at $400 and market rents are closer to $1400.
By Seth Borman on 05.31.19 8:28am
They won’t sustain 10% compound increases, but rest assured, landlords will issue them anyway, to push out marginal tenants, given that their rights to terminate said tenancies are rapidly being eroded. I know a few folks who enjoyed no rent increases for over a decade (thanks to the lack of rent control), who were quite dismayed when substantial increase notices (10% each, not outrageous by any means) became the norm, per advice of counsel, given the clear and present danger that eventually appeared as Prop 10 and subsequent draconian proposals.
Gone are the days when landlords were reticent to raise rents, now it will be "use it or lose it".
Just-cause is a horrible concept. It is already incredibly difficult and expensive to remove a bad tenant, and in many cases, impossible. Layering atop that landlord-subsidized legal counsel, and vicious city, county and federal inspection requirements, even greater property taxes, and other unfunded mandates, and you’ll see even more Ellis action.
By smartalex on 05.31.19 9:13am
This should be entertaining…
By LosFeliz$ean on 05.30.19 9:41am
By MonrovianSurfNutz911FAQ2Serious! on 05.30.19 9:43am
I’m curious. Who’s going to police all of this? Say for instance, your rent goes up significantly after a lease is up. Do you call the California Assembly and complain or is it all based on an honor system?
By subaruwrx on 05.30.19 10:21am
They’ll probably create an "enforcement agency" after a few landlords don’t comply. Then give the 9-4 jobs to their friends and family to create more government bloat. Then their f&f will move into luxury rentals. Bloat isn’t true productivity.
HCIDLA accomplishes so little with the amount of $$$ that is squandered.
By Constituents on 05.30.19 11:20am
And the "enforcement agency" will be based on fees imposed on landlords that are then passed down to tenants to make housing more expensive and create more paperwork and cost.
By Constituents on 05.30.19 11:25am
I’m curious. Have people that have had issues with their rentals always called the California Assembly to complain?
By LosFeliz$ean on 05.30.19 11:37am
It’s up to local housing authorities. Each one will respond in a different way but expect some sort of annual registration process and likely a fee to offset the management costs.
By RXBXUXNX on 06.04.19 12:20pm
Nothing to celebrate here as rents will still outpace wages by quite a lot. CA legislators should be focusing on an easier and quicker process to approve development, but instead our gov’t went for more medling and policing, which will only increase the state budget.
By Stephanie88a99 on 05.30.19 10:34am
Stephanie agreed.
By Wackyone1968 on 05.30.19 10:47am
Rent control should be removed across all of CA. It’s already onerous enough to deal with HCIDLA in Los Angeles and their crappy rules and max rent increases. LA is driving away Landlords and prospective landlords. They don’t have a desire to tear down old housing that is rotting to build something new when more money can be made out of state without all of the complicated rent control rules and building permitting.
By Constituents on 05.30.19 11:14am
I agree with you a 1000%.
By Wackyone1968 on 05.30.19 1:26pm
That’s sort of what it’s supposed to do. If the owners do not like the profit then they sell and invest elsewhere. Making substantial profits off the working class is definitely not sustainable. Something has to give.
By Kermit Kardashian on 06.01.19 12:52am
Oh no, not the landlords…
By Partymuscles on 06.03.19 1:41pm
If these tenants who are working 50 jobs or whatever struggling to pay rent can barely pay their rent, you think they’re up to the task of funding and managing building repairs on top of the rest of their lives? Like it or not, you need landlords/property managers for any place to function.
By disqusted on 06.03.19 3:02pm
Smart idea. Protection from greedy price gouging..
By ByeByeLA on 05.30.19 11:59am
"the housing rights division of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation"
This shouldn’t even be a thing of course, but megalomaniacal ghoul Michael Weinstein needs a fancy name to spend HIV/AIDS patient money on his NIMBYism.
By disqusted on 05.30.19 1:12pm
Michael Weinstein should stick to helping those with HIV/ AIDS.
By Wackyone1968 on 05.30.19 2:04pm
Rent ain’t getting any cheaper folks – these are pretend solutions from politicians who likely own their own homes. It’s the reality of the world. you’ll be making slightly more money as the years go by but the cost of everything will far outpace your wages. The golden years are behind us.
By LAoneWay on 05.30.19 4:56pm
It is as moronic to imply "Housing is a Human Right" as it is to say "healthcare is a right".
A right is something that one can do without the input of others. Protect yourself? Check. Speak freely? Check.
Drive a vehicle on a public road? Nope – that’s a priviledge 9though most of the peasant class apparently believes it is their right as well).
Demanding something from someone else, be that a doctor, nurse or landlord who has put their own time and money and effort on the line because "well you just have to – it’s not fair!" is banal and just wrong. Sure it might feel nice to say it (if you don’t have three neurons between your ears to rub together and base everything on emotion rather than reason) but forcing something from someone else automatically means it is not your "right" to have it.
By f8lee50 on 05.30.19 5:46pm
OMG
By Kermit Kardashian on 06.01.19 12:42am
Los Angeles is the second most populated city in the USA. It has been undervalued for a long time and unfortunately will never be a place to expect anything resembling US median-priced housing.
By Transplant Trash on 05.30.19 7:51pm