• 0
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

Shopping Cart

GPAM
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

LA County Board will draw up rent control measure, despite landlord objections

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. From left: Janice Hahn, Kathryn Barger, Sheila Kuehl, Hilda L. Solis, and Mark Ridley-Thomas. (Credit: Pedro Szekely via Flickr)
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.  (Credit: Pedro Szekely via Flickr)

Nearly a year ago, rent control advocates suffered a crushing defeat when California voters soundly rejected Proposition 10 ballot measure. But in the months that followed, several Los Angeles municipalities  implemented their own temporary rent control and tenant protection ordinances.

And on Tuesday, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors agreed to draw up a measure to permanently cap rents and regulate so-called just cause evictions.

The measure, which the board approved 5-0, effectively sets the terms for the regulations, and is a major blow to landlords in unincorporated L.A. County. The unanimous vote followed an hours-long session, after  more than 100 people took turns voicing their opinion on the topic.

The ordinance must limit rent increases to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index — up to a maximum of 8 percent. The county’s existing temporary ordinance, instituted last fall, limits the annual rent hike to 3 percent.

While a higher cap would give landlords some breathing room, the California Apartment Association, a group representing owners of 65,000 rental units in the Greater L.A. area, questions whether it will be effective.

“I don’t think the cap would ever get that high in a million years,” said CAA L.A. Division Executive Director Beverly Kenworthy. “We think it will probably be around 3 percent. It doesn’t offer us a ton of comfort because we don’t believe that CPI is an accurate measure to base rent increases on.”

The highest annual CPI increase over the last 20 years was 3.8 percent in 2008. The CPI annual increase topped 3 percent five times since 1998, according to the Federal Reserve.

Landlords will be required to provide “reasonable relocation assistance” including cash payments, to tenants they evict without just cause or who are forced out of their units because of repairs or maintenance. Nonpayment of rent and other lease breaches would qualify for just-cause eviction.

Landlords would be allowed to charge tenants for major repairs to their building by means other than a permanent rent increase, such as a one-time fee or a series of payments.

The ordinance is expected to apply to around 50,000 units spread throughout the diverse communities of unincorporated L.A. County, which includes urban areas like Baldwin Hills and rural areas like Wrightwood on the northeast side of Angeles National Forest.

Unincorporated communities are any areas of the county that haven’t incorporated as a separate city, meaning the city of L.A., Malibu, and Santa Monica, for example, are not subject to the ordinance.

Statewide rent control effort

The debate over rent control in L.A. County is playing out as state lawmakers wrap up details on their own statewide rent control measure that Gov. Gavin Newsom has signaled he will sign. Assembly Bill 1482 would cap rents statewide at 5 percent plus inflation and introduce a suite of tenant protection measures. The measures would apply to 1.2 million units across the state, including more than 374,000 in the city of L.A. alone. It would apply to units built as recently as 15 years ago.

The existing legislation, California’s Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995, limits rent control to units built before that year. So, owners of newer buildings are not affected by the ordinance. But the board’s action on Tuesday instructed staff to study whether or not the county could require landlords to pay relocation assistance to tenants priced out of unregulated units built after 1995.

Developers and investors often target older properties in unincorporated L.A. County for redevelopment or repositioning. Investors say that the lack of rent control in the county made it attractive, but cautioned that rent control will force them to look elsewhere.

With AB 1482 in the cards, the CAA urged the L.A. County Board of Supervisors to hold their vote until after the state measure was decided. The CAA is neutral on AB 1482 and Kenworthy said that

“If they implement what the state does, they won’t hear anything from us,” she said.

County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, who represents unincorporated parts of the county north of Malibu and the San Fernando Valley, pushed back on that notion before Tuesday’s vote.

“Don’t think [AB 1482] is a slam dunk to pass,” she said. “There are a thousand lobbyists at the capital, they swarm your office and tell you that rent control means nobody builds housing, and I said ‘that’s B.S.’”

Other jurisdictions in the L.A. area haven’t waited for the state either. More than half a dozen jurisdictions countywide have enacted new rent regulations since a statewide referendum to strike down Costa-Hawkins was defeated last November.

County staff has until mid-November to draw up the final rent control measure and return it to the board for a final vote.

Powered by WPeMatico

  • 10 September 2019
  • The Real Deal
  • Uncategorized
  •  Like
These are SoftBank’s levers to disrupt WeWork’s IPO →← With latest cash infusion, Nextdoor closes $170M funding round
  • Recent Posts

    • Army Corps’ Altadena home debris removal nearly half complete May 16, 2025
    • DTLA adds 500 apartments, brings resi occupancy to 91% May 16, 2025
    • “Gross”: Tracy Tutor hits back at Leonard Steinberg on reality TV May 16, 2025
    • Landlords ink two industrial leases for combined 200K sf in South LA, Harbor City May 16, 2025
    • Hilton Universal City developer drops 18-story expansion plan after City Council approves wage hike May 16, 2025
  • Recent Comments

    • Archives

      • May 2025
      • April 2025
      • March 2025
      • February 2025
      • January 2025
      • December 2024
      • November 2024
      • October 2024
      • September 2024
      • August 2024
      • July 2024
      • June 2024
      • May 2024
      • April 2024
      • March 2024
      • February 2024
      • January 2024
      • December 2023
      • February 2023
      • January 2023
      • December 2022
      • November 2022
      • October 2022
      • September 2022
      • August 2022
      • July 2022
      • June 2022
      • May 2022
      • April 2022
      • March 2022
      • February 2022
      • January 2022
      • December 2021
      • November 2021
      • October 2021
      • September 2021
      • August 2021
      • July 2021
      • June 2021
      • May 2021
      • April 2021
      • March 2021
      • February 2021
      • January 2021
      • December 2020
      • November 2020
      • October 2020
      • September 2020
      • August 2020
      • July 2020
      • June 2020
      • May 2020
      • April 2020
      • March 2020
      • February 2020
      • January 2020
      • December 2019
      • November 2019
      • October 2019
      • September 2019
      • August 2019
      • July 2019
      • June 2019
      • May 2019
      • April 2019
      • March 2019
      • February 2019
      • January 2019
      • December 2018
      • November 2018
      • October 2018
      • September 2018
      • August 2018
      • July 2018
      • June 2018
      • May 2018
      • April 2018
      • March 2018
      • February 2018
      • January 2018
      • December 2017
    • Global Property and Asset Mangement, Inc.
      137 North Larchmont
      Los Angeles, California 90010
      +1 213-427-1127

    © 2025 GPAM