The Supreme Court has previously declined to hear cases regarding rent control. If we have another conservative leaning justice on the Supreme Court, what do we think will happen with respect to the Supreme Court willingness to hear such cases?
See? Very frustrating. A reason for the declination should be required on all cases…
As is customary when the court declines to hear a case, the justices gave no reasons.
What I think is needed is an in depth study of the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment as to how it relates to rent control. Cases seem to fall short, so a concerted strategy to determine under what circumstances will it meet mustard so that the SCOTUS has to review the case. I know, not an easy task…
Nobody is taking anything from you dragonboy. You rent out a property to someone and they spend substantial resources just moving in. They also may have to change their children’s school. Moving in and out is a big hassle. They should be allowed to stay as long as they follow the rules.
I think San Jose’s rent control ordinance is a good one. 5% a year is a reasonable increase.
So, that hypothetical family that moves in and stays 10 years. Under the proposed law change, I can’t raise the rent to what is market rate 10 years later. Don’t you think this particular change would be ridiculous and unfair?
Under Prop 10, you will not be able to raise rent to market even when the tenant moves out. It’s called Vacancy Control. Berkeley had that for years.
Strict rent control is much much worse than the current rent control.
That’s the thing - who makes the rules for the private property that is being leased? Does the owner of the property get to make the rules on the financial return? Or does the state make the rules? Communism ain’t a pretty look. BTDT.
Sell, just sell to owner occupants. There will be no rentals. Don’t build multi family rentals, condos only please.
You don’t need Supreme Court to sell your property or build condos.
I don’t believe there is any such statement in prop 10. It just gives local officials control over rent control. I’m sure somebody will think of that tho.
Believe me, it is on the list…
Other than @sherriff, is there anyone else here supporting Prop 10?
Sheriff keeps our diversity of opinions on Prop 10. He represents one school of thinking.
@sheriff, what is important in Prop 10 which is not allowed in today’s local rent control policy? Do you want rent control on single family house, condo, new apartment? Or do you want the same rent for the new tenant after old tenant moves out? Or do you want both?
I don’t want either. What I do want is local control over housing. If you don’t want to buy in one city move on to the next. As long as the majority of landlords are acting responsibly you should not have a problem.
Government always has the power to control prices, like how much a utility can charge. There could be 1000 reasons against rent control but unconstitutional ain’t one.
Unfortunately, that usually means the owners get hosed because let’s be honest affordable housing is becoming fairly scarce everywhere and the owners are seen as an easy fix…
local control over housing is state confiscation of private property.
Now, the state has always had control over land use (zoning …) but to give the state control over pricing for existing privately owned housing is confiscation.
Not to mention that every time the state implements price controls over anything, the condition that the state is trying to relieve often moves the other way and gets exacerbated.
Hmmmmm. Thanks @sfdragonboy. So I guess part of this argument would be to define what is public use…
5th amendment below -
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Local control over housing has caused high prices homelessness and urban blight. Nimbyies and rent control will ruin us all… The Weiner idea of mid rises on transportation corridors was a good start. Prop 10 is pure evil, communist takeover off all private property… the government basically can take your home away from you and gift it to your tenants.
As long as you have something like the Ellis Act where you can take the property back it’s not government taking away the property. Government is restricting its use in one area: renting it out. You are free to exit the rental market and use it for your own enjoyment.
Not without a huge legal bill and paying extortion money to get the tenants out. This would become statewide.
So you can make a case saying the burden is unjust and should be lessened. I would agree with you there. Try that in lower courts first.