Posted on

Join Californians for Responsible Housing and Vote No on the Justice for Renters Act

The Justice for Renters Act is the latest attempt by Michael Weinstein to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act at the ballot (following the defeat of Proposition 10 in 2018 and Proposition 21 in 2020).

Costa-Hawkins represents a balanced approach to rent control, allowing stabilized rents during a tenancy and market rate increases once the tenant voluntarily vacates. It also promotes development by exempting new construction and owner-occupancy opportunities by exempting single family homes and condos. It was enacted in 1995, in part, to avoid the harsh and unworkable application of “vacancy control” – the permanent control of rental units, even following the voluntary vacate of its tenants.

Vacancy decontrol has proven to be a necessary feature of a functioning market, promoting the investment in, and maintenance of, quality, affordable rental housing. Vacancy control would pick winners and losers based on chance (or worse, black markets, with the “selling” of low-rent housing by tenants to their chosen assignees), further alienating newer renters. It would discourage investment in rental housing, leading to further scarcity in housing at a time when California desperately needs more.

Costa-Hawkins.com encourages you to join the Californians for Responsible Housing and vote “no” on the Justice for Renters Act. You can read their fact sheet here. You can find out more at californiansforaffordablehousing.org. Please donate to the opposition campaign by contributing to the CAA Issues Committee, and most importantly vote “no” this November.

facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Posted on

“Proposition 10: 2.0”: Michael Weinstein’s Second Effort To Repeal Costa-Hawkins at the Ballot Box

california state seal

Proposition 10 boldly failed in the November 2018 election (with only a couple bay area counties voting “yes” in a majority). The battle over Proposition 10 was one of the most expensive in California history, and the “no” camp was ultimately successful in arguing that expanding rent control would “increase the states housing shortage, exacerbate overall affordability issues and hurt the investments of single-family homeowners”.

Not to be deterred, Michael Weinstein of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation is back with Proposition 10: 2.0:

Titled the Rental Affordability Act, it would seek to expand the authority of cities to regulate rents by changing several provisions of the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act (including the name of the act itself, which must be synecdoche for “statewide unaffordable rental rates” for tenant advocates by this point.)

It would remove the “new construction” exemption, in favor of a 15-year phase-in period for newly built units. It would remove a lesser known provision that grandfathers in exemptions in local ordinances that pre-dated the act. Most sweeping, it would eliminate the language of “vacancy decontrol” and replace it with a state-wide policy authorizing local rent control ordinances. (This language would mostly be symbolic, given the landmark decision Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley (1976) 17 Cal.3d 129, where the Supreme Court first recognized this authority.) Finally, for cities administering a rent control ordinance, the Rental Affordability Act would restrict the rental rate to 15% above the rate for the previous tenancy (with no provisions evaluating the fairness of the previous rate – e.g., if it was leased to a family friend at a steep discount).

Unsurprisingly, the California Apartment Association has taken a position against the new initiative.

facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Posted on

SF Examiner Reports on Sup. Peskin’s Efforts To Put “Vacancy Tax” on November Ballot

The SF Examiner reports on the efforts of Supervisor Peskin to put a rental unit “vacancy tax” on this November’s ballot, for both residential and commercial properties. (San Francisco already requires registration and fees for vacant buildings.)

According to the Examiner, “Details are still being worked out, but the intent is to apply the tax to residential properties with three or more units. After six consecutive months of a vacancy, the property owner would pay $250 a day until the unit is leased”.

San Francisco’s ongoing efforts to create more housing has manifested in interesting ways over the years. Turning vacant units into residential rental units would obviously add to the rental housing supply. But whatever the actual language of the law, it is difficult to imagine that a special tax on those who refuse to enter the residential rental business is not a violation of the Ellis Act. (Buildings of this size would also need to register for the City’s gross receipts tax if they are used as rentals.)

facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Posted on

California Proposition 10 (2018): Voters Reject Repeal of Costa-Hawkins

sfc-sfgate-logo

SF Gate reports on the defeat of Prop. 10 at the ballot. The measure to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act “fell behind early and continued to trail by a margin of about 65 percent to 35 percent throughout the night”.

Proposition 10 followed AB 1506 (2017), a legislative attempt at repeal, which failed to get out of committee.

For now, cities remain capable of implementing new rent control ordinances. However, Costa-Hawkins will continue to limit the extent of local price controls (as cities cannot impose price ceilings on “new construction”, apply “strict” vacancy control to empty units, or extend rent control to new tenancies in single family homes and condominiums).

facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail
Posted on

“Costa-Hawkins Repeal” Effort May Be Heading Directly To Voters

This Monday, Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, filed a proposed ballot initiative with Office of the Attorney General, aiming to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act.

The ballot measure would send the issue of repeal directly to the voters, following the decision of Assemblymembers Chiu and Bloom to slow-track their legislative effort for repeal (AB 1506).

Continue reading ““Costa-Hawkins Repeal” Effort May Be Heading Directly To Voters”

facebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail