Anonymous user
Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act reform: Difference between revisions
Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act reform (view source)
Revision as of 01:16, 12 January 2018
, 6 years agono edit summary
imported>Tmccormick No edit summary |
imported>Tmccormick No edit summary |
||
Line 48:
== New buildings exclusion ==
== Issues / Concerns ==
=== Expanding rent control could disincent creation of new rental housing ===
=== Problems with using intiative process ===▼
[NAR 2018].
=== <br/> Should these rent-control aspects be determined by the state or local governments? ===
Assemblymember Richard Bloom (D-Santa Monica), sponsor of [[AB1506|AB1506]] repeal bill: ▼
<blockquote>''“At the same time, while I understand why some want to put this change on the ballot, it is never ideal to address a complicated issue like this through the initiative process,” Bloom said. “First and foremost, the initiative process is a simple up or down vote that does not allow for any public input, shuts down dialogue amongst stakeholders, and prevents anyone from making changes to address any concerns raised by those impacted by the proposal.'' ''“Secondly, if there are unintended consequences down the road that need to be fixed, it will require a 2/3 vote of each house of the Legislature – a threshold not easily achieved. For these reasons, something this complicated is better left to the legislative process. AB 1506 remains a vehicle for responsible dialogue and, I hope, legislation that will ease the economic burden that is affecting so many Californians.”<br/> - quoted in ''</blockquote> ▼
Line 73 ⟶ 74:
[CAR 2018]
▲=== Problems with using intiative process ===
▲Assemblymember Richard Bloom (D-Santa Monica), sponsor of [[AB1506|AB1506]] repeal bill:
▲<blockquote>''“At the same time, while I understand why some want to put this change on the ballot, it is never ideal to address a complicated issue like this through the initiative process,” Bloom said. “First and foremost, the initiative process is a simple up or down vote that does not allow for any public input, shuts down dialogue amongst stakeholders, and prevents anyone from making changes to address any concerns raised by those impacted by the proposal.'' ''“Secondly, if there are unintended consequences down the road that need to be fixed, it will require a 2/3 vote of each house of the Legislature – a threshold not easily achieved. For these reasons, something this complicated is better left to the legislative process. AB 1506 remains a vehicle for responsible dialogue and, I hope, legislation that will ease the economic burden that is affecting so many Californians.”<br/> - quoted in ''</blockquote>
== Alternative reform proposals ==
| |||