Students at Turlock’s Pitman High School take on Proposition 33 on rent control
As part of a larger mock election unit he’s conducting at Pitman High School in Turlock, teacher Isaac W. Farhadian had his students in AP U.S. government and politics, U.S. government and economics write letters to the editor.
Because of the volume of letters, we are breaking them up by ballot proposition. We are publishing batches of letters, sometimes edited for length, in the weeks leading up to the Nov. 5 election.
The following letters regard Proposition 33, which would repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. The 1995 act prohibits local ordinances limiting initial residential rental rates for new tenants or rent increases for existing tenants in certain residential properties.
Limit how landlords can raise rent
Dear Editor,
I´m baffled by the cost of rent in California. Rent has increased 30% from 2020 to now and renters in California pay 50% more for housing than renting in any other state. But Proposition 33 proposes to limit how much landlords can increase their rent. This proposition will help people in California. The price of rent is so insanely high in California that people are leaving. Rent being increased by 30% makes it harder for people to be able to pay rent with only one minimum-wage job. During the pandemic, many people were not able to pay their rent and may still be recovering from that. With rent and inflation being super high, it is hard to provide yourself with certain necessities. Poverty in California has increased 18% in 2023. California has the highest cost of living in the nation. Prop. 33 would help people who have a background of low income. With rent being so high, this greatly affects all the single parents because they are working so much just to make sure they can pay rent and also buy other necessities. These are just some of the reasons why you should vote Yes on Proposition 33.
Alexxia Bautista, Turlock
Affordable housing crisis goes far beyond rent control
Dear Editor,
We know that when people think of our state, what comes to mind are issues like homelessness and the exorbitant cost of living. A solution obvious to many is rent control, and that’s for a reason: A 2018 Stanford study found that people in rent-controlled housing were more likely to stay in that residence. But market manipulation has consequences, like decreasing rental supply, decreasing construction, and increasing rents for other people (shown in that same study and others).
There’s so much literature on the topic, I can’t say for certain whether Prop. 33 would be a benefit or a detriment. What is clear is that increasing the supply of affordable housing will solve a lot of our problems, but I’m not sure easing these restrictions on cities will greatly exacerbate the housing crisis. If you trust city governments to not make silly and imprudent decisions, vote yes, and if you don’t, vote no. What matters is that it will take a lot more than rent control to solve this problem!
Logan Warren, Turlock
Repealing act would worsen situation
Dear Editor,
The continuous inflation rate of rental housing is outrageous! I am completely against the suffering for the 55% of Californians paying more than 30% of their income on rent and the additional 60% of residents living paycheck to paycheck; these individuals are one rent increase away from becoming homeless. Even under these horrific circumstances, we still cannot allow more government control over businesses in our capitalist society. Proposition 33, repealing the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act, would worsen the housing crisis rather than improve it. This referendum will increase costs of taxation, maintenance and insurance, which will cause landlords to struggle financially, leading to a decrease in housing quality, as well as a decrease in new housing investments. This is what I call construction hesitation, where developers don’t see a profitable gain, which slows down new housing development. This would exacerbate housing shortages, heighten competition for available units, and eventually increase homelessness. The challenging aspect of different city regulations and circumstances would also make it unfair to the municipalities with fewer resources than the larger residential areas. With that being said, I encourage all to whom it may concern to vote NO on Proposition 33. Most importantly, DEMAND FOR A BETTER SOLUTION!
Marvin Polanco, Turlock