Submission: Prop. 10 would prevent housing prices from rising above what students can afford

Many students keep complaining about the increasing costs of tuition and fees, and justifiably so. But when the costs of attending college are broken down, one expensive item on the price tag stands above the rest: housing.

Skyrocketing rent prices in California have made it increasingly unaffordable for students and the state’s vulnerable populations, such as people of color, people with disabilities and low-income people, to find a place to live. In November, California voters will have the opportunity to pass Proposition 10, a state measure that would give local governments the agency to curtail these escalating rent prices and help address the state’s housing crisis.

More than half of California’s 6 million renter households use more than 30 percent of their income for rent, and almost a third – totaling more than 1.7 million households – use upwards of 50 percent of their income for rent, according to the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Los Angeles County alone is home to more than one-third of California’s homeless population. In fact, studies in the past two years have shown that about one in 20 University of California students, one in 10 California State University students and one in five Los Angeles Community College students experience homelessness.

In light of the widespread shortage of affordable housing, Nicole Montojo, a housing research analyst from UC Berkeley’s Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society, said rent control is the only timely solution that can stabilize the rental market.

Proposition 10 will facilitate this process and restore the ability of local governments to implement strong rent control laws by repealing the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act of 1995. Costa-Hawkins prohibits local governments from capping rent on units built after February 1995 and permits landlords to raise the rent on a unit once a tenant moves out. This has hurt renters whose wages and incomes have not been keeping pace with rising costs of housing.

If Proposition 10 passes and successfully repeals Costa-Hawkins, local governments will be able to correct local housing markets with rent control policies and keep families from being evicted, bringing relief to everyone. It removes the state from the picture and lets local governments implement policies that make the most sense for their respective regions.

UCLA undergraduates – 34 percent of whom receive Pell Grants – and other students across the state would be positively affected by this state measure. High rent costs contribute greatly to the cost of college and often compel students to take out larger loans, increasing their debt and postponing their chances to advance economically.

Senior citizens, people with disabilities, farmworkers and people of color are particularly vulnerable to the housing crisis as they tend to have lower incomes and face additional housing barriers. Like students, these populations are more likely to have other substantial costs, such as from health care, and more likely to face discrimination and inadequate accommodations. Proposition 10 is designed to address this widespread and intersectional issue of housing affordability.

Opponents of rent control, often with real estate interests, argue that more development would boost the housing supply and subsequently bring prices down. However, local parking regulations, zoning restrictions, building requirements and community resistance have inhibited the development of affordable housing for decades. The 2017 housing legislation package passed by Gov. Jerry Brown was meant to address this and stimulate development, but it still pales in comparison to the benefits of an artificially constrained housing market.

Additionally, university studies and city government reports have shown that rent control does not inhibit new construction. Rather, they often found that market cycles and other local conditions, such as financing availability and zoning laws, exert a larger influence on the rental housing supply, suggesting that opponents of Proposition 10 are overstating the impact of rent control on development. In fact, construction of new rental units in the largest cities with rent control – Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose – has outpaced that of the surrounding areas.

Moreover, landlords are still guaranteed a fair return by the state constitution. Proposition 10 would protect renters mainly from big corporate landlords – not small, “mom and pop” landlords – who seek to price-gouge rents and make more profit.

Nonetheless, rent control and additional housing development are both needed to truly resolve our state’s housing crisis. Unraveling the knot of restrictions on low-income development will be a meticulous and lengthy process, whereas rent control will more immediately relieve millions of renters. As Montojo puts it, “We need to be thinking about the needs of the people who are most impacted right now.”

Come Nov. 6, registered voters in California will be able to turn out to the polls and vote “Yes” on Proposition 10 to help tackle housing unaffordability across the state.

Duong is a third-year economics student and a basic needs campaign director for the Undergraduate Students Association Council external vice president’s office.