Los Angeles County's ongoing debate on rent stabilization saw a contentious vote on Tuesday that advanced a proposal to limit rent increases to a maximum of 3% per year for many landlords in unincorporated areas. This step, which requires further voting to become law, would apply to pre-1995 buildings, of which there are approximately 51,700 units spread across neighborhoods such as East L.A., South L.A., and the San Gabriel Valley. Small property owners could see rent increases capped at 4%, with luxury units being capped at 5%, according to the Los Angeles Times.
The proposal put forward by Supervisor Holly Mitchell aims to balance the need for affordable housing with the financial viability of small landlords. However, some landlords argue, carrying the significant weight of rising insurance costs, that these constraints might drive them to sell their properties. Supervisor Mitchell was quoted in the Los Angeles Times, "My goal — always — is to slow the tide of the corporatization of rental property ownership across LA County... When that happens, affordability goes out the window."
Amid this backdrop, Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn cast her vote against the motion, underscoring the need for consistency in rent control policies. A statement on June 4th from Hahn, retrieved from content.govdelivery.com, explained her decision: "LA County has a strong rent control policy in place—and I think it's important for renters and landlords alike to be able to count on consistency in that policy. That is why I voted to keep our current policy in place and limit rent increases to 4.275% this coming year in unincorporated LA County."
While the motion to draft a change to the rent stabilization ordinance passed with a 3-2 vote, skepticism was voiced by Hahn and Supervisor Kathryn Barger who expressed concerns over the effects on smaller property owners. Having to cope with increasing costs, "We’ve once again put these struggles on the back of landlords," Barger stated, according to remarks captured by the Los Angeles Times. Tenant advocates, on the other hand, cautioned that rent hikes higher than proposed would push many to the brink, as Christina Boyar from Public Counsel warned of renters often being forced to choose between covering rent or other basic needs.
Landlords at the Tuesday meeting voiced concerns about a possible "tsunami of displacement." Fred Sutton of the California Apartment Association criticized the proposal as "draconian," highlighting that it could deter investment in new and existing housing, potentially worsening the housing crisis. Meanwhile, Bill Oswald, a Long Beach property owner, relayed his reluctance to sell to corporate interests: "I don’t think that corporations moving in and taking over these properties will help anyone whatsoever," he told the Los Angeles Times.
The board's vote to extend the temporary 4% cap on rent increases through December adds further complexity to the county's housing policy landscape. The subsequent decision on whether to implement the permanent 3% cap will be a crucial juncture in determining the path forward for rent stabilization in Los Angeles County.
