Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/24/2026 Item 4a, Taylor Wally Taylor <marquettetwins@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, February To:E-mail Council Website Subject:Not in favor of rental registry The City of San Luis Obispo is studying the creation of a “rental registry” and will also schedule a follow up session on “rent stabilization and eviction protections”. Rental registries are relatively uncommon statewide. Fewer than 10 percent of California cities have one, The pattern across California is clear: with few exceptions, rental registries are part of broader rent control or inspection frameworks. We have shared goals---- stable housing, well maintained properties, fair treatment, and more housing supply. We support safe, well managed housing. We question whether a rental registry is the right tool to solve “the problem” the City is struggling to define. This is about housing supply, property rights, and unintended consequences. Only 38 of 520 code enforcement cases involved safe housing issues. About 7% of the City’s code enforcement cases over the past year and a half were related to true health and safety or habitability issues. The overwhelming majority, more than ninety percent, were traditional nuisance or property maintenance items like weeds, trash, storage, signage, and similar exterior issues. This data shows that serious safe housing violations are a very small share of overall code enforcement activity. Policy should be data driven, narrowly tailored, and mindful of impacts on investment and rental inventory. Key data and policy points 1. California already regulates rent increases statewide 2. Under AB 1482, annual rent increases are capped at 5 percent plus CPI, up to a maximum of 10 percent. This applies to most multifamily properties over 15 years old. 3. Before creating a local registry, the City should clearly identify what gap in existing law it is trying to fill. 4. Professionally managed units are not the problem San Luis Obispo has roughly 8,000 or more professionally managed rental units. These properties already operate under compliance systems, fair housing laws, and state rent caps. There is no demonstrated pattern of systemic abuse within professionally managed housing in SLO. 5. Rental registries are rare in California Of the 35 or so cities with rental registries, the almost all 31 of the 35 also have rent control or mandatory inspection programs. Many in the real estate community believe the proposed rental registry is not a standalone policy but the first procedural step toward rent control and expanded eviction 1 regulations. The concern is not abstract. The City already has a rent stabilization and eviction protection study session scheduled on an upcoming agenda. It is fair to ask why those discussions are advancing at the same time as a rental registry unless the registry is intended to lay the groundwork for those policies. If the City intends to move toward rent stabilization aka rent control, it should be transparent with the public about that direction. A rental registry is often the administrative backbone for rent control systems in other California cities. The data we do have locally does not support the narrative of widespread eviction abuse. Of the approximately 8,000 + professionally managed rental units in San Luis Obispo, there have been approximately six evictions over the past ten years. That does not reflect a systemic eviction crisis within the professionally managed housing stock. It is also important to clarify that a rental registry will not address Cal Poly related housing pressures. Student demand, enrollment growth, and campus housing capacity are separate structural issues. Creating a registry for local property owners will not reduce student demand or materially change university driven market dynamics. If the City’s goal is to collect data, there are already reliable sources available. The American Community Survey provides detailed housing data, including median gross rent, rent by bedroom size, vacancy rates, tenure by renter versus owner, housing age, and household income levels. That data can help policymakers understand trends without imposing new administrative burdens on local housing providers. Before creating a new regulatory system that could reduce investment and shrink rental supply, the City should clearly define the problem it is solving, present objective evidence of that problem, and be transparent about whether rent control and eviction regulations are the intended next step. If SLO does not intend to implement rent control, it should clearly articulate why a registry alone is necessary and what measurable outcome it expects. 6. Administrative burden affects supply Registries require fees, reporting, compliance, staff time, and attorney fees. Small property owners, especially those with one or two units, may choose to exit the rental market rather than navigate new requirements. When owners sell or convert units, rental inventory shrinks. Reduced supply drives higher rents. 7. Investment climate matters The city of San Luis Obispo already faces high construction costs, lengthy permitting timelines, and regulatory complexity. Adding new layers of oversight without clear evidence of a problem signals to investors that the City is becoming more restrictive and is not in fact “pro-housing”, This can reduce reinvestment in existing properties and discourage new housing production. We have privacy and cybersecurity concerns A rental registry would create a centralized database containing sensitive information about property ownership, addresses, and contact details. Even if the City intends to keep the registry private, centralized databases are frequent targets for cyberattacks and data breaches. If hacked, this information could expose property owners to fraud, harassment, or safety risks. Before collecting new personal and property data, the City should clearly explain what information would be stored, how it would be protected, and 2 why the benefits outweigh the real cybersecurity and privacy risks. Creating a new database of sensitive information should be treated with extreme caution. 8. Data should come first If the City believes there is a widespread issue, it should present clear data showing the scale and nature of the problem. Policy should respond to verified need, not anecdote or political pressure. Why not use the existing business license system instead of creating a new registry? If the City truly needs basic ownership or contact information, there is no need to build an entirely new regulatory program. San Luis Obispo already has a business license system in place that rental housing providers use today. The City could simply update that existing process to ask property owners to list their rental addresses as part of annual license renewal. That approach would achieve the same basic data goal without creating a costly new bureaucracy, new fees, or a new compliance burden. Before launching a standalone rental registry, the City should fully evaluate whether existing systems can meet its needs in a simpler and more efficient way. W Taylor 3