The Effects of Rent Control on Homelessness

When advocating for those experiencing homelessness, it is easy to forget about those who are housed. However, the two are not separate spheres but rather parts of a larger ecosystem. Keeping people in their homes and keeping properties affordable are both important goals to keep in mind for someone who is trying to reduce homelessness. Those goals are precisely what rent control targets. 

Rent control is one of the most misunderstood, and most important, anti-homelessness measures. Many governments have tried to keep people in their homes through rent control which prevents tenants from being unduly evicted or forced out by high rent. Most rent control measures include a cap on how much rent can be increased and/or under what conditions a tenant may be evicted. If evictions can only be given in certain circumstances—typically called “just cause” evictions—then rent control typically also includes provisions on how much a landlord who evicts a rent controlled tenant must pay for them to relocate. The actual rent control varies city by city, and, in some cases, depends on the building as well as the tenant. While there is little in the way of a California-wide rent control for all buildings—though some programs exist for some buildings—there are increasing efforts to change that. Recently, Proposition 21 was presented to California voters as a way to expand rent control.

In California’s 2020 election cycle, overshadowed on the national level by the presidential election and even on the state level by the multi-million dollar app-based driver debate, another debate was going on over a proposition to give local governments more power to enact rent control—Proposition 21. Proposition 21 appeared on the ballot stating the following: 

Amends state law to allow local governments to establish rent control on residential properties over 15 years old; allows local limits on annual rent increases to differ from current statewide limit; allows rent increases in rent-controlled properties of up to 15 percent over three years at start of new tenancy (above any increase allowed by local ordinance); exempts individuals who own no more than two homes from new rent-control policies; in accordance with California law, prohibits rent control from violating landlords’ right to fair financial return.

In the end, the proposition failed. While this outcome is unfortunate for advocates for affordable housing, it is important to learn and expand awareness of the issue. 

This article is not meant to just show the failure of more uniform rent control. Rather, it is a call to action to learn more about rent control, learn about your rights if you do rent, and to advocate for these issues in upcoming elections. Advocating for rent control is not about taking down landlords or pushing for generic, vague, hot button issues, but is about securing the housing of tenants such that people can stay in their homes and continue to afford them. Hopefully, with more awareness, the next Proposition 21 will be a great success for tenants. 

A rally in support of Proposition 21, a statewide rent control ballot measure, was held at Los Angeles City Hall on Sept. 8. (Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

About the Author

Michael Egan is a Junior studying History as well as Philosophy, Politics, and Law from Pasadena, CA. Outside of Trojan Shelter, you can catch Michael exploring Los Angeles or practicing with USC’s club fencing team.