What do you all think of these rent control and other rent regulations like capping rents and landlords abilities to earn income to pay for repairs and all the expenses of owning property? Rent control on a surface level seems helpful and simple enough but really it contributes to housing shortages, bubbles, and all sorts of political greed. In the end the people who benefit from the rent control are people who are entitled and take advantage of the system. It's never for what they try to sell you on.
There's a lot of political push to do rent control and expand rent control from Seattle to Chicago to New York. From Los Angeles to Dallas to Florida. It's crazy.
Some of the big groups coming up. A lot are actually trying to pit landlords and us investors against tenants. It's sad because most landlords are just small scale investors like the ones here who are trying to make payments from mortgage, insurance, repairs, cap expenses etc. They call us "Greedy landlords"
If you dig deeper these groups are funded by huge large scale politicians who really want to get mass votes.
Economic rent control articles
Memphis Brooklyn pittsburg
Note some signs being held are for socialist party and entitlement rights.
These people don't understand that rent control and rent caps and rent regulations actually end up hurting low income people. It's those that take advantage of the system that benefit just like any messed up system like heathcare, insurance fraud, politics (don't want to get into how corrupt things are but I think we can all agree)
Anyways these "gentrification" "displacement" "eviction free" slogans always seem like good idea but when you study the economics they're never good. Look how terrible and how much corruption there is in the LA housing area they are tearing down rent control buildings and its lead to a lot of disruption in the free market.
These misguided efforts by politicians (vote gaugers) end up negatively affecting communities
- Like any price control, restriction begets more restriction. If rent increases are only allowed between leases, rational landlords will not hesitate to evict bad tenants, even where under market price landlords would have more compassion for the same bad tenants. This translates to demand for further government interference on behalf of tenants, i.e., into deeper bureaucracy, more policing, and ever-more-developed landlords' search for loopholes.
- Landlords afraid of statistically-inevitable squatters will rationally prefer shorter-term renters, inadvertently discriminating against just the people rent control is ostensibly designed to help, like retirees or families with young children.
- Rent-controlled apartments cause stagnation. Tenants paying below-market prices for apartments are unlikely to move, even for higher wages or better jobs. This suppresses long-term economic growth, marginally disincentivizes the rent-controlled tenant's instinct to findanywork when unemployed, and depresses neighborhoods' development overall.
- Landlords paying more for apartments than they're able to collect in rent cannot afford to maintain or repair units. Apartments stay in disrepair for the duration of rent-controlled tenancy, until landlords can collect market prices and therefore pay plumbers, caulkers, repairmen, etc.
- Demand skyrockets for the few available apartments. Unable to respond to rising demand in the logical way--raising price--landlords impose conditions on renters, or stop responding immediately to renters' complaints because, after all, with such low vacancy levels renters have nowhere to go. This keeps relations between landlords and tenants tense and aggressive--hardly the friendly neighborhood model community-minded rent control-ers had in mind...!
- Rent control reduces landlords' incentives to rent out apartments. This means that rent control in a city keeps apartments available for rent scarce.
Just read this and other studies/ articles on the real effects of rent control:
I understand what you mean I currently own a rent control apartment and the tenants are planning on staying for a long time. I believe with minimum wage going up in Los Angeles they may/may not leave the property and move to a better place.
The system works to the benefit for the tenants but I have kicked out tenants with the right law team. So there a huge give and take with rent-controlled properties.
If only they put as much work into learning a valuable skill as they did into those signs...
No, in all seriousness, it's a crappy situation on both sides. Though, I think there is enough data that shows rent control doesn't really solve problems long term. And it's so easy to go around them anyway. Tenants will bid up properties, pay under the table, and make all sorts of arrangements just to secure a place. And landlords will just as easily be able to screen out tenants they don't want, discrimination or not. I don't have the answers, but things like forcing landlords to accept all pets won't solve any real problems.
Let the free market decide the rent price. Capping rent affects the value of the property significantly. Why should the government dictate how much your property is worth? By controlling the amount of rent you can receive, this places a cap on the value of the property as well. Owners are less likely to improve their properties to market conditions due to deflated rents. Enacting rent control in NYC has had some really negative consequences, those costs are still being paid, albeit not by the consumer.
There are reasons all owners do not improve their rental houses year over year, sometimes there is a demand for lower quality homes with inexpensive rents. If they improved these homes to an average level, they would also want to increase the rent to an average level as well. Last year in Dallas the mayor and a slum lord got into a spat because the houses weren't in livable condition according to the city. The slum lord said to bring them up to code he would have to raise rents significantly or close down the properties. He opted to close down the properties, in part due to the costs. This had the effect of displacing hundreds of residents who had been paying an average of $400-500 per month for their rental house. The market rate of rent is likely closer to $1000 depending upon the quality of the residence. So yes, sometimes there is a need for substandard housing. Its not pretty, I personally would not choose to live in those conditions, but for some it is a reality. To think that the world owes you something is a fallacy. The world does not owe you a class B property. In fact the populations in undeveloped nations are likely living in worse conditions.
Rent control will never force someone to pay above market price; it will only be used to prevent the market price of rent from being paid. The city can enact different strategies to improve living conditions and home ownership, like raising property tax for non-owner occupied residences. The city can build its own rent free complexes as they operate for a different goal than a private investor.
California Legislative Alert
On January 11, 2018, the California Legislature will vote in Committee to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Act. If they are successful, cities will be authorized to permanently control the rent of all properties.UNIVERSAL RENT CONTROL THROUGH CALIFORNIA this is just one step towards it
AB 1506 (Bloom)repeals the Costa-Hawkins Act. If it is approved by the Assembly Housing Committee on anuary 11, 2018, the Assembly Housing Committee will vote to grant local governments the power to prevent rent increases at the time of initial and subsequent rentals. The Assembly could also ban property owners from recovering costs when making improvements or repairs on all rentals, including single-family homes and condominiums. Owners will have no power or rights to reset rental rates to market when a unit becomes vacant.Assembly Bill AB-1506
What You Must Do!
Rental property owners must raise their voices and speak out against this outrageous and targeted attack against rental property.
If you live, work, own or manage property, please call Assemblymember Ed Chau, who sits on the Housing Committee, as soon as possible and ask him to VOTE NO on AB 1506 (Bloom).
STEPS TO FOLLOW:
1) Contact Assemblymember Ed Chau at:https://caanet.org/on or before January 9, 2018.
2) When the call is answered:
a. Identify yourself as a person involved in therental housing industry within California.
b. Ask the Legislator to VOTE NO on AB 1506(Bloom).
c. Thank the Legislator’s staff for taking your call.
Respectfully, I disagree [email protected] Justin K. Some good sometimes comes from limited governmental guidance. The problem with the political environment today is that no one is willing to find the middle ground: our options are RIGHT or LEFT as though the giant expanse in between doesn’t exist, or something.
Take a look at Massachusetts ‘ MGL 40b. This piece of legislation incentivizes DEVELOPERS (ie, “haves”) to create LOW INCOME housing (ie “have nots”) by relaxing zoning requirements for that particular development. This is done on a City by City basis— if there’s already a significant amount (determined by statute) of low income housing in that area, then you won’t get a relaxation of zoning policies.
If anyone is unfamiliar with zoning in Mass, and specifically eastern Mass, please understand that this is generally one of the worst zoning environments in the country— I have worked on commercial and infrastructure projects nationwide.
Now, you can imagine that this is a highly controversial statute— people here HATE that developers have ways around, they HATE that “those people” can find housing in their neighborhood, and the NIMBYs hate the projects anyway— that goes without saying.
Me? I’m quite proud to have this option in my primary jurisdiction. It’s not a carte blanche approval, but can help based on the projects’ justifications. Furthermore, It solves two problems (housing and zoning) , provides for those who need a hand, and allows development to continue onward.
There’s a middle ground. I have no idea what OP could do in her jurisdiction to urge for the middle, but believe me, it exists.
If rent control were to come to my area , I would cash out .
It's a tired argument. Any desirable areas would immediately be condoized, marginal areas would become run down quickly. Also some landlords will deliberately create unsafe conditions so the building can be condemned. Everybody loses with rent control.
Easier solution! If you can't afford to live in a gentrifying area move 45 minutes from just about any major city that you can easily afford.
This is exactly what has happened to the house buying middle class. I grew up 15 minutes from Boston, most of my high school classmates have been pushed closer to 1 hour away, there is no "house control" you just have to adapt.
Here's an update. They'll be puttin gthis to vote in November 2018 http://beta.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-...
Battle won, but the tenants right groups that are funded by Open Society are being sent to ballot. Call your local state reps and tell neighbors, and all homeowners that we have to protect our freedom and rights to do our small businesses and investments. This is my only retirement as I don't depend on social security nor have medicare or anyhting else. All I have are my properties and rents to survive.
Look up TenantsTogether.org they are going to put it to a vote.
These tenant groups are big. People like Free stuff. Rent Control LA TIMES COSTA HAWKINS and 1506
Update. A lot of tenant groups and entitlement groups are using the rent control to push their politicians into local government spots
Rent controls will only accelerate the ghettoization of So Cal and Orange County.
Anywhere rent control occurred across the nation - it resulted in a deterioration of the community.
Nobody wants to address the REAL causes of higher rents - like illegal immigration - that lowers supply thereby increases demand.
Rent control push through LA area
California AB1506 got pushed back for now
Portland Rent control push
This is just a couple months away. This will affect every owner of property in California forever...
Make sure to vote NO on Prop 10. Prop 10 would allow really invasive rent control and repeal the Costa Hawkins act which prevents invasive rent controls