Fact-checking the ads for Proposition 33, California’s rent control ballot measure – The Mercury News

By Felicia Mello | CalMatters

Confused about Proposition 33? You’re not alone.

A recent poll shows the ballot measure to give local governments more ability to limit rent increases is running neck and neck, with nearly a third of voters undecided.

Prop. 33 would repeal a state law known as the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act that prevents local governments from controlling rent on single-family homes, homes built after 1995 (or earlier in some cases), and when tenants move out. If it passes, local governments could create whatever measures they want to limit annual rent increases, and the state couldn’t intervene.

Tenant advocates largely support Prop. 33. Landlords are bankrolling the campaign against it. Democratic officials are split : Some side with tenants on the importance of keeping rents down on existing homes. Others are more focused on increasing overall housing supply, and want to make sure homes are profitable for developers to build and landlords to operate.

You wouldn’t necessarily know all this from the attack ads airing on TV and mailers fluttering into Californians’ mailboxes. Both sides say they stand for affordable housing, and some of the arguments have included a few head-scratching claims. We fact-checked some of those claims, so you don’t have to.

Claim: Prop. 33 would repeat more than 100 state housing laws, including affordable housing requirements and eviction protections.

Ken Rosen, a UC Berkeley business school professor, makes this claim in a No on 33 video ad.

Opponents of Proposition 33 argue that it would give cities who don’t want to build housing a way to undercut new development: by mandating rents so low that developers couldn’t afford to build. They say that they could make it hard to enforce recent state laws aimed at addressing the housing crisis, such as the “builder’s remedy” that relaxes zoning rules in cities whose housing plans haven’t been approved by the state.

“A city would be able to create the economic conditions to basically ignore those laws and requirements,” says Nathan Click, a spokesperson for the No on 33 campaign.

But that’s not the same as repealing those laws. And California courts have held that rent control policies are unconstitutional if they don’t allow landlords to earn “a fair and return on their property” — meaning any city that tries to force reasonable landlords to charge obviously unfeasible rents, such as $1 per month , could face legal challenges.

Verdict: False

Claim: Prop. 33 could create over 500 local rent boards

A No on 33 mailer makes this claim, pointing out that the rent boards would have the “power to regulate single-family homes, add fees to housing, and even dictate what you can charge to rent out your own home.”

There are just under 500 cities in California, and all of them could theoretically create rent boards to regulate local rents, whether or not Prop. 33 passes.

Under Prop. 33, those boards would be able to cap rent increases on single-family homes, potentially affecting income for both corporate and mom-and-pop landlords.

Rent boards can charge landlords fees to cover their operating costs — in San Francisco, for example, it’s $59 per unit — but current law already allows them to do that and would not change under Prop. 33.

Verdict: Mostly true.

Claim: ‘Rent control is an American tradition for over 100 years.’

This, from a Yes on 33 video featuring actor Blair Underwood, is pretty accurate.

“Fair rent” committees sprang up in dozens of United States cities in the early 1920s, and rent control became popular during World War II, helping drive an increase in homeownership.

However, more than 30 states have since passed laws banning local rent control. In the states that do allow some form of rent regulation — including California and New York — more than 200 local governments have passed measures limiting how much landlords can charge, according to the National Apartment Association.

Verdict: Mostly true.

Claim: Prop. 33 would replicate the strongest rent control law in the nation