FOR RENTERS

​​

Why Housing Control Doesn’t Work (and would backfire in Burbank)

​

Housing control (a.k.a. Rent control) in Los Angeles County, while often pitched as a solution to housing affordability, has a track record of falling short and even exacerbating the problem. Here’s why it doesn’t work:

​

1. No New Builds - It kills the incentive to build new housing. Developers and housing providers see capped rents as a signal that profits will be limited, so they either scale back construction or shift to luxury projects exempt from controls—like condos or high-end apartments. LA’s housing shortage is already dire; the city needs about 500,000 more units to meet demand, according to some estimates. Rent caps make that gap harder to close. Look at San Francisco: despite strict rent control, its housing supply grew at half the rate of other U.S. cities between 1970 and 2010, while prices soared.

​

2. It Screws Over New Renters - Existing tenants under rent control might benefit temporarily, but anyone entering the market—like young people or transplants—faces a brutal squeeze. Housing Providers, unable to adjust rents to market levels, often raise initial prices sky-high or convert units to non-rent-controlled uses, like short-term rentals. In LA, where rent-controlled units (built before 1978 under the 1979 Costa-Hawkins Act) are locked in, vacancy rates are razor-thin—around 3%—because tenants cling to their below-market deals. Newcomers get stuck competing for a shrinking pool of unregulated, pricier options.

​

3. Lower housing quality - With revenue capped, many housing providers are forced to cut corners on maintenance or upgrades. Why sink money into a property if you can’t recoup it? Plus many mom-and-pop housing providers with only 1 or 2 units cannot afford out-of-pocket maintenance that isn’t covered by rent. Studies, like one from Stanford on San Francisco’s rent control expansion, show controlled units are more likely to be poorly maintained—think leaky roofs or outdated plumbing—hurting tenants in the long run. In LA, older rent-controlled buildings often lag in upkeep, while landlords prioritize profits elsewhere. Burbankians deserve safe, quality housing. 

​

4. It does NOT keep costs down (or not nearly enough!) - Housing control creates a two-tier market: controlled units stay artificially low, but uncontrolled units spike to offset losses. A 2019 study by the American Economic Review found that in San Francisco, housing control drove up market rents by 5% annually as housing providers compensated. LA has seen similar trends—median rent for non-controlled units hit $2,800 in 2023, far outpacing wage growth.

​

5. Burbank’s real issue is NOT greedy housing providers - it's supply. Supply that is choked by zoning laws, high construction costs, and red tape. Rent caps treat a symptom—high rents—while ignoring the disease: not enough homes. They distort the market, discourage investment, and leave most renters, especially the vulnerable, worse off. Burbank’s rejection of rent control in 2020 aligns with this logic—practical solutions beat feel-good bandaids every time.

​​

​​