at the ballot box last November, Democrats have introduced a
package of housing bills to expand rent control in the state. The
first, AB 36, would repeal key provisions of the Costa-Hawkins
Rental Housing Act by allowing cities to apply rent stabilization
measures to rental units older than 10 years and extend these
controls to single-family rentals and condos. At present, any
rental units built after 1995 are exempt under the Costa-Hawkins.
The second, AB 1482, intends to establish a definition of
rent gouging in a similar way to Oregon’s state-wide rent control
law, and prohibit rent increases beyond a government-mandated
percentage rate. AB 1481 would institute a Just Cause Eviction
ordinance requiring property owners to prove a specific and
valid reason for evicting a resident in court, while AB 724 intends
to create a statewide rental database on rental units containing
information on eviction fillings and rent increases.
On the East Coast, three rent control-related bills in New
York propose closing perceived loopholes in rent regulations.
Assembly bill 2351 would implement vacancy control, preventing
property owners from increasing rents to market rate when
a resident moves following the end of a lease term. A second
bill, S2605, establishes harassment of tenants residing in rent-
regulated units as a criminal act.
Illinois is the last state with multiple rent control bills on the
table. While HB 255, which would have repealed preemption,
died in committee on March 29, three others are still in play and
could be taken up next session. HB 3207, the Rent Control Act,
would establish county rent control boards in every county and
includes provisions relating to qualifications of members, vacancy
of a Board member seat and meetings and duties of the board,
which include establishing restrictions on rent increases, notice
requirements of rent increases and the creation of a reserve
account for property owners for repairs and capital improvements.
HB 2192 is similar to HB 3207, except the state would be split into
six regions, each with its own rent control board.
CONCLUSION
The threat of rent control is real in a growing number of
jurisdictions around the country. NAA will continue to actively
monitor rent control legislation nationwide and work with the
affiliate network to supply critical resources to support their state
and local advocacy campaigns.
However, affiliates and members must remain vigilant. Rent
Control has become the policy of choice for renters’ rights
groups and policymakers because of its perception as an off-
the-rack solution to housing affordability. While rent control
regimes benefit a section of current residents, in the long run,
it greatly inhibits the housing market’s ability to supply housing
to people across the income spectrum and reduces city and
state property tax revenue substantially. The result over time is a
dwindling supply of controlled housing and skyrocketing rental
prices of uncontrolled units, exacerbating affordability issues,
disincentivizing necessary development and creating a static
rental market.
www.aamdhq.org
MAY 2019
TRENDS | 47