When I first moved to San Francisco, it was fun, hip, and affordable. Today it’s none of those things. Many factors drove its decline, but extreme rent control played a major role.
Back then, buildings with four units or fewer were exempt from rent control. My plan was simple; live on-site and rely on rental income in retirement. Landlords could give a struggling artist or young family a chance because if things didn’t work out, they could reclaim the unit. As regulations tightened that flexibility disappeared. Renting became a lifetime commitment, making it nearly impossible to remove even a problem tenant.
The predictable result? Small landlords became far more selective, favoring higher-income tenants who were less risky. The very people rent control was meant to help — artists, service workers, and young families — were squeezed out.
Successive “housing emergency” laws made matters worse. Many small owners could no longer cover their costs and sold to corporate landlords with legal departments. The landlords most willing to work with tenants disappeared.
Price controls don’t create housing. They discourage investment, reduce supply, and shift costs onto new renters. I lived this.
Santa Barbara’s draft Rent Stabilization Ordinance reads with no regard for balance. Forcing landlords to operate at a loss will not make housing more affordable. The City Council should pursue policies that actually encourage housing — before this town follows San Francisco down the same ruinous road.
