Pasadena City Council will neither support nor oppose a proposed charter amendment on the November ballot that could institute rent control in the city.
The decision was made unanimous Monday with a 5-0 vote by City Council, which came after hours of public comment and discussion on the merits of rent control in other municipalities. Mayor Victor Gordo recused himself from the discussion because he is a landlord.
Rent-control proponents first united with tenants, homeowners and community leaders to celebrate the submission of 15,000 signatures supporting the placement of the “Pasadena Fair and Equitable Housing Charter Amendment” back in May on the steps of City Hall.
The effort that was made possible only after months of petitioning outside of grocery chains and Lake Avenue storefronts, which volunteers said was made easy because they believed were advocating for a worthy cause.
Proponents say the “Pasadena Fair and Equitable Housing Charter Amendment” will limit evictions unless a landlord can show there is good cause, such as non-payment of rent or a breach of the contract.
The proposed rent control charter amendment also seeks to:
- Limit rent increases to 75% of the annual increase in Consumer Price Index;
- Establish a Pasadena Rental Housing Board; and
- Provide guidelines around “just cause” evictions.
Proponents believe these are strong but necessary protections for tenants, which they see as a positive for a city where 57% of households rent rather than own, according to the city’s 2021-2029 Draft Housing Element.
They point to numbers showing that half of Pasadena tenants pay more than 30% of their income in rent and a quarter of the city’s tenants who contribute more than 50% of their income to rent — according to the city’s Draft Housing Element.
And most of the nearly 30 people who commented on the matter during public comment at City Council on Monday agreed as they detailed inhabitable living situations, rising rental costs and other issues with renting in the region.
A school teachers said during public comment she’s been unable to find a lawyer to help with her cause because there are so many others in her situation.
After hearing the arguments, Councilwoman Jess Rivas said, “I don’t believe there’s enough data before us tonight to take a position against the measure.”
Her peers, however, weren’t as sure.
“There is a cost to this, which we think is a societal benefit, but we’re gonna make just a small group of people pay that cost. And those happen to be the same people that are providing the rental housing that we have already,” Councilman Steve Madison asked, begging somebody from the city to provide a rationale.
“If we think this is something that’s good policy, why shouldn’t we all pay for it?” Madison added, wandering why the sponsors of the initiative weren’t offering to pay to provide more rental housing stock and cheaper rents themselves.
Councilmember Felicia Williams had similar queries while she argued her belief that rent control could have unintended consequences in the city of Pasadena.
“It begs the question: Why are landlords footing the bill for this when there should be places, there should be educational institutions, there should be employers that should really be contributing their fair share to supporting affordable housing as well,” Williams said.
Because what happens under rent control, according to Williams, “is people with great credit and great jobs get the apartments and they keep them for 20 years.”
Opponents of rent control repeated the sentiment shortly after the submission of the 15,000 signatures last May, insisting housing is a business. And if residents want nice housing, then landlords have to have the funds in order to support upkeep and other management costs.
Councilman Gene Masuda, siding with a majority of the Council, said it was unfair to put a burden of keeping rents low “on the backs of landlords.”
Unable to come to a consensus on some aspects of the November rent control measure — including the definition of most — the Council voted unanimously to refrain from taking an official stance as a group, meaning voters will not see a statement from the city when they receive their November voting pamphlets.
Individual members of the Council are still free to speak about rent control in their individual capacity and city staff noted other organizations are able and likely to submit arguments of their own.
Despite the fact the Council decided to remain neutral and not file any arguments for or against the measure, rent control proponents viewed the decision as a win.
“We won a significant victory last night,” Pasadena for Rent Control tweeted. “What matters for now is that the city as a whole will not fight this. Individual council members will do as they please but the city is neutral on the issue.”
What matters for now is that the city as a whole will not fight this. Individual council members will do as they please but the city is neutral on the issue and someone else will write the opposition arguments in the voter guide. 5/x
— YES on H! Pasadena for Rent Control! (@Pas4RentControl) August 9, 2022
