Hacker News Reader

Comment by tmh79 | Hacker News Reader

do you have any clue about this specific measure? Its limited to buildings that are 15 years old or older, and it limits rent increases to 8% annually, which in practice is about 1 - 3% of all lease agreements in CA, a very small amount. Commercial construction loans are based on the 15 year revenue generating potential of the proposed building, this law was created specifically with that in mind so as not to interfere.

View on HN

> do you have any clue about this specific measure?

Any price control inevitably has negative consequences in the market. This is practically a law of economics.

> Its limited to buildings that are 15 years old or older, and it limits rent increases to 8% annually, which in practice is about 1 - 3% of all lease agreements in CA, a very small amount.

If it with have such minimal effect why even have it?

> Commercial construction loans are based on the 15 year revenue generating potential of the proposed building, this law was created specifically with that in mind so as not to interfere.

Then it's not as bad as it could be. Doesn't mean it's justified.

The landlords that jack up rent more than 8% a year, at least in SF, are the commercial landlords of large apartment complexes like Avalon. At the very least this will stop the ones managing older complexes built 2004 and earlier from doing that anymore.

This is simply about spreading out massive rent hikes over the course of a few years instead of a few months. It gives families time to adapt or move. The allowable increases under this law are very high.

It may not seem justified to you, but to a low income family in a rapidly gentrifying area, it means everything.

All you need to do is say, if you're increasing the rent by more than 7% then you need to give a years notice. That's it.

What’s a year’s notice going to do for anyone that 60 days doesn’t already?

> Any price control inevitably has negative consequences in the market.

And what is the magnitude of the consequences of this law? That’s what matters. It’s very small.

> Any price control inevitably has negative consequences in the market. This is practically a law of economics.

There is an exception: if the price ceiling is higher than the market price, then the ceiling will have no effect. It may be that the allowed rate of increase is high enough that it's an ineffective price control, in which case there would be minimal market distortion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com