Tenant advocates in Richmond and Alameda have filed preliminary paperwork to place rent control initiatives on the November ballot.
In both East Bay cities, the initiative efforts are in the early stages, and in neither case has signature-gathering begun.
The California Apartment Association, which remains opposed to rent control, is studying the filings and working to determine the best response in each city.
The pursuit of initiatives follows months of wrangling over how to address housing shortages in the East Bay and other areas of Northern California.
Last year, the Richmond City Council approved a rent control measure, but a CAA-backed referendum prevented it from taking effect and ultimately led the council to repeal the ordinance. Council members who favor rent control, along with the Richmond Progressive Alliance, are largely driving the current initiative push.
In Alameda, the pursuit of a rent control initiative comes just two weeks after the City Council tentatively approved binding arbitration to settle rent disputes — effectively a form of rent control.
Under this ordinance, which the council formally adopted Tuesday, March 1, a tenant who disputes a rent increase over 5 percent can have a mediator decide how much rent can go up. And the amount can be as low as the arbitrator chooses. On March 15, the city of Mountain View will also consider binding arbitration.
CAA holds that building more housing is the best way to increase housing affordability, a belief echoed in this report from California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office. Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters also cites the report in this Thursday’s column, “California’s high housing costs symptom of weak supply.”
Walters writes that “coercive approaches to housing, such as rent control ordinances” detract from the real issue: California’s undersupply of housing.
“A not-in-my-backyard mentality, and the political inertia it spawns, are the biggest impediments to easing California’s housing crisis,” the column says.