Guest Opinion | Ryan Bell: Vote Yes on Proposition 33 to Protect All Renters in Pasadena

When I spoke with folks during the Measure H campaign, now two years ago, many who opposed rent control would say things like, “Rent control doesn’t work. Look at Santa Monica or San Francisco. They have rent control and the rent there is among the highest in the country.” Another common argument I heard was, “Rent control favors people who already live in the city and disadvantages people who want to move in.”

We have a chance to fix these problems.

While these statements are at least partially true these are not features of rent control itself.

The rent control we are permitted to have in California is deeply limited by a 1995 state law called the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act. Under this law, cities are not allowed to extend rent control to single family homes and condos.

Even though there are many low- and middle-income tenants who rent single family homes, they’re excluded simply based on the type of building they live in.

Costa Hawkins also prohibits cities from regulating rents in buildings built after 1995.

You may have noticed how the year 1995 gets further and further in the past with every passing year. What’s more, cities who passed rent control in the 1970s, like Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Santa Monica, San Francisco, Berkeley, and others, are frozen at the year they passed their law. For example, Santa Monica can’t regulate rents on units built after 1979.

The intent here is clear: gradually make rent control irrelevant by prohibiting it altogether.

Finally, Costa Hawkins prohibits the regulation of rents between tenancies. When one tenant moves out, landlords are permitted to raise the rent to whatever they can get for the unit.

For years, rents have dramatically outpaced inflation (see Pasadena City Charter 1803 (c)-(d)) and due to Costa Hawkins that continues to happen.

So, when opponents of rent control say rent control doesn’t work, the reason is that the real estate lobby passed a law in 1995 ensuring that it would never work completely.

This is why rents continue to be the highest in the nation in spite of rent stabilization.

Proposition 33, which is on your ballot right now, seeks to repeal Costa Hawkins and return control over rent stabilization to cities. It doesn’t impose anything on unwilling cities. In fact, the opposite is true. Proposition 33 would give cities control over their own rent regulations, should they choose to enact them.

That’s it. All the fear mongering you’re hearing on TV and receiving in the mail is—sad to say—lies.

I encourage all voters in Pasadena to vote Yes on Proposition 33 so that the intention of Measure H can be extended to people who rent units built more recently and we can keep rents affordable even between tenancies. This will fix the problem so many opponents of rent control have expressed: it won’t favor incumbents over newcomers, and rents won’t continue to be the highest in the nation.

Finally, it’s important to remember that regardless of what happens with Proposition 33, landlords will continue to cover all their expenses and make a profit. Landlords are constitutionally entitled to a fair return on their investment.

The Pasadena Rental Housing Board has spent nearly a month working out the details of this provision but, in short, it means that if landlords are not able to increase their income year over year by a factor of 50% of the Consumer Price Index (a measure of inflation) they are entitled to an additional rent increase. That is California constitutional law, and it is backed up by the United States Constitution. That’s not going to change through a State ballot initiative.

So please vote Yes on Proposition 33 so we can protect more tenants in Pasadena and keep our community safely housed.