Santa Barbara is being asked to accept an emergency rent freeze as though it were the only moral choice: urgent, unavoidable, and overdue. But when you look closely at how this proposal came about, a different picture emerges. One that has far less to do with sound housing policy, and far more to do with political timing.
An “Emergency” Created by a Memo
The current push for a rent freeze did not emerge from a comprehensive housing study, a years-long planning process, or broad community collaboration. It began with a two-person memo filed in October by councilmembers Wendy Santamaria and Kristen Sneddon, requesting that rent stabilization, including a possible rent freeze, be brought before the City Council.
Within weeks, the issue was fast-tracked. By December, City Council was already being asked to consider emergency action, bypassing the kind of economic analysis, stakeholder engagement, and deliberation that policy of this magnitude demands.
That alone should give residents pause.
Emergency ordinances are meant for earthquakes and wildfires, not for policies that permanently reshape an entire housing market.
Timing Matters, Especially in an Election Year
Timing matters in politics, and it matters here. Councilmember Kristen Sneddon has announced she is running for mayor. Her likely opponent, Mayor Randy Rowse, has been publicly skeptical of rent control-style policies.
The memo appeared in October. The issue was heard in December. And now, an emergency rent freeze is being framed as a moral imperative, just as campaign season accelerates.
Is it a coincidence? Readers can decide for themselves.
But it is fair, and necessary, to ask whether Santa Barbara is being asked to accept sweeping housing policy based on what plays well politically, rather than what actually works for the people who live here.
Who Really Provides Housing in Santa Barbara?
Lost in the rhetoric is a basic reality: Santa Barbara’s rental housing is overwhelmingly provided by small, local “mom-and-pop” owners. These are retirees with duplexes, families with a few units, longtime residents who invested locally and stayed local. They are not hedge funds. They are not faceless corporations. And they are already under intense pressure:
Insurance costs have doubled or tripled
Maintenance and labor costs are up sharply
Utilities, taxes, and regulatory compliance continue to rise
Financing costs are the highest they’ve been in decades.
A rent freeze does not freeze those costs. It simply freezes income.
The predictable result is deferred maintenance, delayed repairs, and owners exiting the rental market altogether. That doesn’t help tenants. It hurts them.
The Evidence Is Clear: Rent Freezes Don’t Deliver
This isn’t speculation. It’s well-documented. Cities that adopt strict rent freezes see reduced housing supply, less reinvestment in existing units, and declining housing quality over time. Even places with long-standing rent control programs have found that such policies often reduce available rental housing and increase long-term rents by discouraging new supply and pushing small owners out.
Santa Barbara already has too little housing. We cannot afford policies that shrink it further.
Politics Is Not Housing Policy
Housing policy is hard. It requires patience, compromise, and honesty about trade-offs. There is no free lunch. But emergency rent freezes offer something politics always craves: a clear villain, a simple slogan, and immediate applause.
That may be good campaign strategy. It is not good governance.
If City Council truly wants to protect tenants, it should slow down, study the data, and engage everyone affected, including the people who actually provide housing.
Santa Barbara Deserves Thoughtful Leadership
This city has a long tradition of careful, community-driven decision-making. We should not abandon that tradition now. Before rushing into an emergency rent freeze born of a two-person memo and propelled by political momentum, City Council should ask a harder question:
Are we solving a problem or staging a moment?
Santa Barbara’s renters, housing providers, and future residents deserve policies rooted in evidence, not election cycles.
This is not about personalities or elections, but about process, consequences, and responsible housing policy. Housing is too important to be reduced to politics.
