PD Editorial: Hits and misses with Santa Rosa’s housing initiatives

Surging housing prices and plummeting vacancy rates have prompted the Santa Rosa City Council to come to the defense of renters. The city is exploring a variety of housing-related initiatives including passing a version of rent control and developing a program to boost rental inspections to reduce the backlog of complaints about substandard housing conditions.

First, let’s explore the latter, the more supportable of the two.

The problem, as identified in a series of investigative stories by Angela Hart (“Stuck in squalor,” Jan. 23-26), is a shortage of inspectors for the city to follow-up on code complaints. The city groups reports of code violations into three categories. The positive news is the city has none pending that are considered category one - immediate life and safety issues. But Santa Rosa has a backlog of 1,169 active cases for category two complaints - those concerning substandard housing conditions, illegal dwellings and unpermitted construction. The city also has 523 active cases on category three complaints, which are considered nuisance issues.

Given that the city only has 3½ code enforcement officers and receives more than 1,000 complaints per year, that comes to nearly 300 cases per officer. It doesn’t pencil out.

As a result, the Santa Rosa City Council is considering expanding its crew of code enforcement officers through a program to be funded by property owners. It’s a sensible solution. What’s not sensible is letting residents live in substandard living conditions hoping the city will get around to investigating their concerns all while worrying about landlords retaliating against them for raising red flags. This idea should be elevated to the top of the City Council’s to-do list.

Meanwhile, we’re less sanguine about another of the city’s housing initiatives - adopting a form of rent control. The council now appears to have the votes to move ahead with a “limited” or “soft” rent stabilization plan. This calls for establishing an annual cap on how much rents of certain units could increase. But the rents of individual units wouldn’t be tracked, which would allow the city to avoid the exorbitant cost of a traditional rent control program.

A consultant has estimated that the city could adopt such a program for as little as $28,000 a year. Color us skeptical. Even a limited rent control program requires staff time to investigate complaints of landlords who fail to follow the rules. Remember, that is how the city has fallen behind on investigating code complaints - a lack of staff.

Yes, there are merits to such a program, particularly if it provides flexibility for owners to raise rents by as much as 4 percent and allows for suspension of the program if and when vacancy rates ease up.

At the same time, we also remain concerned about the equity of such a program, knowing that under state law it would only apply to those units built before 1995. That’s only about 20 percent Santa Rosa’s housing units. And then there are the other complications. For example, the city of Richmond in July became the first city in the state in 30 years to adopt rent control. But the city quickly repealed the law when local property owners forced the city to be decided on the ballot. Real estate leaders have indicated that a similar fate would await an ordinance limiting rent in Santa Rosa and making it harder to evict tenants Putting it to voters may not be such a bad outcome. But in either case, residents will need to be persuaded that rent control-light is doable, equitable and defensible. We’re still not convinced.