Assembly Standing Committee on Housing and Community Development

Okay, this one is mine. All right. Are we on? All right, everybody. Welcome. Ready. Welcome to the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee hearing. We have 19 items on our agenda today. Item 17, AB 1055 Boerner has been pulled at the request of the Author. We have three items on consent. Items AB413, 1152 and 1275.

Amendments to item 19 will be taken as authors amendment in local government to facilitate an earlier in print date to facilitate the goals of the hearing. Within the time that we have, each Bill can have two minutes. Sorry, Two main witnesses in support and opposition each will have two minutes each.

Feel free to submit written testimony through the position portal on the Committee's web website. And this will become a part of the official record of the Bill. We will not permit any conduct that disrupts, disturbs or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of today's proceedings. This morning we are in room 126 in the Capitol.

The hearing room is to be open for in person attendance in this hearing. But all are encouraged to watch the hearing from its live stream on the Assembly's website. And I appreciate all of the folks who are here this morning in the room watching, who are here in the hall who will be joining us.

Everyone who is here to be a part of this discussion. You are most welcome and also thank you in advance for your patience and understanding. Today we will begin our special order business of business item with AB 1157 Kalra , which is item one and item two, which is ACA 3 Haney

And I just do want to note because of the number of folks who are here for 1157, we are going to have the author present and then we are going to have the main witnesses in support and the main witnesses in opposition.

And then we are going to open it up to both support and opposition who want to add their support, our opposition, one by one, who. Who are here as Members of the public. So with that I will turn it over to. Oh, sorry. First we have to establish forum. Can we take the roll, please?

[Roll Call]

All right, we have a quorum, Mr. Kalra.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Members. AB 1157, the affordable rent act will help stabilize the rental housing market by lowering the annual rent cap, expanding tenant protections to tenants and single family homes and making these tenant protections permanent.

In 2019, the state passed a landmark bill that changed the livelihoods for so for many tenants across the state, however, so much has changed in six years and while the Tenant Protection act of 2019 established rent gouging and just cause protections, we did not anticipate a global pandemic that drastically impacted housing in our state.

Families continue to struggle and are being forced to choose between paying their rent or groceries. Our current law has to be updated to address today's housing affordability crisis and bring immediate relief to millions of renters. California is home to roughly 17 million renters, making it the second largest state for renters in the country.

Before the pandemic, a study reported that over half of the renters were cost burdened, paying more than 30% of their total income to rent and the other half the renters were severely cost burdened, paying more than 50% of their income and rent.

Families across the state have been impacted by devastating natural disasters, COVID 19, the Great Recession of 2008, the increase in cost of living, and the recent Los Angeles fires. We are all familiar with the stories about housing being too expensive in metropolitan cities like the Bay Area or La.

But areas that were once considered more affordable like Fresno, Merced and Bakersfield are no longer affordable to working class residents. Since 2020, these areas have seen rent increases of up to 40%. In 2023, Bakersfield saw an increase of 39.4%, Merced 35.3 and Fresno 38%. No place in California is considered affordable anymore.

And that's why in 2016 there were 15 local jurisdictions in California that had some rent stabilization or rent control ordinances. 10. Today, a full 35 jurisdictions have such local laws, including many, although not all, of our more populous cities and counties, creating a hodgepodge of different rules when it comes to stabilizing rents.

The reality is California has been facing a housing crisis that has been a result of decades of neglect from housing affordability, homelessness and housing supply. We're doing a tremendous amount of work and have been for a number of years on housing supply and I've been supportive of those eff.

However, we cannot continue to ignore the current present time struggles that so many renters are going through. Existing law allows landlords to raise the rent every year which is capped at 10%.

And while some jurisdictions have taken action to establish their own rent control ordinances, other parts of our state are not covered and many places show no sign of slowing down on top of the cost of living. Current law does not universally apply to all Renters tenant protection should not be determined by the structure that you live in.

Some 2 million households live in single family rental homes in California, making up about 34% of the rental market. And most are being left without these tenant protections simply by virtue of the physical structure of their rental unit.

We must act now to ensure every tenant in California is afforded tenant protections and help keep families from being displaced, keep workers near their jobs and ensure no one is pushed into homelessness. Californians need immediate action while our state continues to build a more affordable and market rate housing.

We cannot afford to do nothing while we wait 5 to 10 years to build more housing. AB 1157, the affordable rent cap will lower the cap to CPI plus 2% or 5%, whichever is lower, remove the single family home exemption and remove the sunset sunset date.

By stabilizing rent and expanding the protections to tenants in single family homes, we can keep people in their homes and make housing more affordable to allow families to thrive. Housing is a human right and we must do what we can to help keep people in their homes.

There's supply issues, there's demand issues, but what we must also focus on is ensuring that we have the maintenance of current housing stock, which really also means keeping families in their homes. They're in right now. With me today to provide supporting testimony are Tammy Alvarado, a tenant, and Leonor Godinez, a small landlord.

We also have Brian Augusta with Public Interest Advocates on behalf behalf of the sponsor coalition to answer technical questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members.

Good morning. Can you. Okay, good morning. My name's Tammy Alvarado and I'm a renter in San Diego County and a member of ACE. When we first moved into our home, our rent was 1425 a month. It's now 2780. That's a 95% increase. Last October, our rent was increased 8.8% which amounted to $220 a month.

And with another rent increase expected this October. Because we live in a single family home rental, we have zero limits on these rent increases. And just because we live in a single family home, we have no protections. It seems so unfair. My landlord owns a number of properties and this house was purchased in 1974.

The mortgage is paid off and he's protected under Prop 13 for his taxes. But every year my rent goes up. So the house is also neglected and they often refuse to make repairs. I have purchased a stove, I have put in two toilets and a brand new kitchen sink all on my own diamond, unreimbursed.

My whole family Works overtime just to survive. My husband's a mover. He works 12 to 15 hours a day so we can afford our rent and we're in our late 50s. There's a total of eight Members in my family, including two minors that we live together just so we can pay the rent.

But no matter how hard we all work, our wages will never increase to match the constant rent increases. Most people's American dream is to buy a house and ours is just to remain in our house unless something changes. Becoming homeless is a reality for my family. It's just a matter of time.

I'm not the only one going through this. In California, for every 100 people that exit homelessness, there's another 118 that become homeless. If you guys are really serious about addressing the homeless crisis, please stop this pipeline of families being forced from their home by the skyrocketing rent increases.

Passing AB 1157 would finally protect families like mine and single family home rentals and prevent us from becoming homeless. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Leonor Godinez. I was born and raised in Oakland, California and have lived in California all my life and mostly in the Bay Area.

I own a duplex in Oakland which I originally bought as my primary residence and have maintained it over the years in order to be able to provide for myself additional income in my retirement, which thankfully it does.

The City of Oakland has had a Rent Adjustment Program Adjustment program for over 40 years with the primary goal of keeping people in their homes. This program limits the annual percentage for rent increases. For at least the last 10 years, the allowed increase has hovered around 3%.

While this may sound low, it provides for a potential rental increase of $60 per month or around $700 per year. Increased revenue to the landlord on the average cost of a one bedroom apartment. This ensures a manageable rent increase for the tenant while still providing increased revenue for the landlord. That's at 3%.

AB 1157 is asking for 5% rent cap. I have great tenants. Thankfully they pay their rent on time. When there's an issue, they let me know. And if there's something that needs to be done, I address it. I manage my property, ensuring I have the necessary funds to address any unforeseen expenses.

Last year when one of my units was eligible for an increase, I chose not to apply it. Why? Because I looked at rents comparable rents in the area and they were at a good rate. The rent on my apartment or my it's actually a home. I felt an increase wasn't warranted and Let alone fare.

I know I don't have to charge exorbitant rents to maintain my property and have income laws like these wouldn't be necessary if we had just landlords not only looking out for themselves, but looking out for their tenants and their community.

The 5% rent cap being requested in AB 1157 is a necessary step to providing the housing stability and rental cost relief that most people, that many people around the state need. I urge you to pass AB 1157. And let me add, unlike the people in red, I'm not paid to be here.

I am here because of my faith and moral compass draws me to fairness and compassion. Thank you.

Thank you to, to both of the witnesses. We're now going to bring the witnesses in opposition. And we'll. We want to keep you close because once we come to the dais for Members of the Committee to ask questions, they may have questions of the. Of the witnesses. So we'll now have main witnesses in opposition.

And you'll each have two. Two minutes.

Okay.

Good morning, Members. Deborah Carlson with the California Apartment Association. So let me start by saying, in the words of the Legislative Analyst Office, rent control discourages new housing. It does not resolve supply, and it exacerbates affordability.

When Proposition 33, the rent control measure, was filed in 2023 and then moved forward in 2024, multifamily housing permits dropped from 60,000 in 2023 to 30,000 in 2024. The market responded. Anticipation of what could happen with Proposition 33. Unfortunately, 1157 will field this fall.

I know you acknowledge that housing supply is our problem, but unfortunately, we believe that 1157 will fuel this fall. Three times the voters said no to rent control. 1157 is attempting to change the Tenant Protection act. The promise when 1482, which was the original rent cap, was passed, is that it would remain in effect for 10 years.

The intent was to give the Legislature time to pass laws to promote housing construction. Obviously, this breaks that promise. The single family homeowners here today in red not paid, are here as single family homeowners. They come from the Bay Area.

They will not be able to continue with these types of rent caps and have indicated they will not. Many of them also suffered from COVID They did not get any rent for those three years that Covid wasn't in place.

And of course, as we know, in Los Angeles, many rental property owners also suffered with the destruction of their housing. So for all of these reasons, we respectfully ask for your no vote today. Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Kareem Drisi, on behalf of the California Building Industry Association, in strong opposition. So currently California has a two tiered rent control system. So we have a baseline standard with AB 1482 sets the rent cap at 5% plus CPI. And then we have a stricter standard.

A local jurisdiction can adopt a stricter standard under Costa Hawkins. And so if they want to make the rent cap 1% or even zero, they can do that. So we have a two tiered rent control system in the State of California, strongest in the nation. What this bill does is three key provisions that are problematic.

First and foremost, it takes that 5% red cap and it makes it 2%. Again, we already have. The local jurisdiction can already adopt a stricter standard. So we find that baseline standard that's supposed to work for all 58 counties, one size fits all approach.

We find that extremely problematic that they want to make it from 5% to 2%. Secondly, currently in existing law there's a limited single family home exemption that's there by design. Limited single family home exemption basically provides its single family homes owned by individuals or families are exempt from the rent cap.

The reason for that is that we were trying to protect two key constituencies. We were trying to protect seniors. They often own one single family home. That's their retirement. And we were also trying to protect individuals and families of color because we want to foster and continue to promote generational wealth amongst individuals and families of color.

And so that equity based exemption was limited, thoughtfully crafted, and it's there for a reason. This bill seeks to eliminate that exemption. We find that extremely problematic. Also, this bill eliminates the Sunset date of 2030 prior to the LAO issuing their report on the efficacy of the rent cap. It's statutorily mandated by AB 1482.

They have to produce a report on the efficacy of the rent cap so that the Legislature can make a determination as to whether or not to extend that sunset date. This bill does that prematurely by eliminating that sunset. We also find that incredibly challenging. For these reasons, we do oppose this bill.

And also I would say on a personal note, as a first generation Arab American, I find this bill extremely problematic and we urge a no vote. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much to the witnesses. We are now going to open this up for the folks who are here to add their support or opposition. So we're going to open it up.

We're going to do this all together, which is not usually how it's done, but I know there are many folks who are here and we don't want to have to go through the long process of making sure we separate in that way.

So if folks will follow the directions of the sergeants in terms of how we want to do this. I just want to say also before we start out that there are many, many hundreds of people who are here.

And I know that each and every one of you have a story to share and an experience that is relevant to this conversation. Unfortunately, we are not going to be able to hear each person's experience. Everyone will just be asked to give their position, their name, where you're from, and an affiliation if you have one.

I have to be consistent to that because there are so many people who are here. That is all we are able to hear from folks today. But if you want to share your story with us, you want to share your experience and provide more input, please do email us to the Committee and we will all receive that.

That communication.

Yeah.

We'Ll begin. Well, sorry that he was given 22 witnesses. Yeah, go ahead.

Okay. My name is, my name is [unintelligible] and I'm here with the community group A. We are here because Iran increases too much. They increase me.

Sorry, I just, I just need your name, affiliation and. And your position. I'm sorry, I have to be consistent or we're going to be here to the weekend.

Okay. My name is [unintelligible]. I'm with the community group ACE. I'm. I'm in favor to the 1157.

Buenos Dias. Mi nombre es Sophia Mendoza. Soy miembro de Los Angeles.

Just going to interpret really quick. The last 23 folks were from Los Angeles and they're asking for support for AB 1157.

Hi, good morning. My name is Patricia Mendoza. I'm from San Diego, California. I am totally. Please, please support this. My rent increase is 240 and I a dollars a year. I don't think none of us make that much. Our raises don't go up that much. I'm full support. Thank you.

Yes, I'm Jesse Brooks and I'm from Oakland, California. I'm with the Housing As A Human Rights and I support AB 1157.

Hello, I'm Annie Martin from Oakland, California and I'm here to support the housing 1157.

Hi. Hi. Hi. My name is Claudia Reynolds. I'm with ACE Richmond and I definitely want you to vote yes on AB 1157. 1157. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Patricia. I belong to ACE. I come from Contra Costa and I ask you to support 1157.

Hola. Buenos Dias. Mi nombre es Tomasa Martinez. Soy miembro de Bengo De Los Angeles, California.

Good morning everyone. My name is Tomasa Martinez and I live in Los Angeles and Los Angeles and I was harassed and I also was getting kicked out of my apartment. Disabled currently and I cannot afford the rent to go up. Please support AB 1157.

Hi, my name is Brandon, I'm here with ACE from Los Angeles and I'm in full support with AB 1157.

Hello, I'm Anthony Azul. I'm from San Diego, California, United States Army Veteran. And if you support veterans, please pass AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Barbara Pinto, I'm From San Diego, 80 years old, still working. I'm asking you to please support this Bill 1157 and support please people on fixed incomes and senior citizens. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, my name is Michael Wharton. I represent a resident on Bay Area Community Land Trust in in Oakland, California. And we recently assessed ourselves a 2% red increase in our co-op. And so I'm here to demonstrate it can be done and I urge you to vote yes on AB157. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Emmanuel Cruz. I'm with Los Angeles ACE and I support 1157. Hope you guys.

Good afternoon, Chair Members. Bernice Krieger, con Association De Realtors De California. For this reason we ask for no vote. Gracias.

Good morning. My name is Eddie Gums. I'm the co-chair for ACE Antioch, also from Contra Costa County, and we support AB 1157.

Hola mi nombre es. Marta Pastano.

My name is Martha Pastrano. I'm from Richmond and I'm here to support AB 1157 and I'm also an ACE Member.

Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Raymond. Thank. Thank you for having me. My name is Valerie and I'm from the Crawford family here in Sacramento. We are in full support and hope that you can vote yes on AB 1157.

Hello, I'm Violet Crawford and I am in support of 1157.

Gotta love the youth. My name is Kyra Lee. I'm here with Contra Costa County, Faith in Action, East Bay National Council for Negro Women, Howard University, proud daughter of two Black Panthers and resident of Richmond, Contra Costa County and my daughter attends Vallejo. Please support AB 1157.

Jess Hudson, United Way Bay Area in Support.

Hi, Nadine Arbueza. I am an activist from Richmond, California. I'm here in support of AB 1157 and I'm here representing Faith in Action and ACE.

Hi you guys. I'm a California native, a lifelong Renter. I'm always going to be a renter. I have housing insecurity right now. Being harassed. I have some statements. Since I can't speak today, I would like you all to read it and share it with your fellow Assemblyman. And listen to us constituents. This is not a joke.

Housing is a human right. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Cindy Rowan. I'm with Sacramento Act and I urge you to pass AB 1157. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Eric. On behalf of the 16,000 low income Members of ACE who are fighting for climate for housing justice, please support this legislation. Let's keep people in their homes.

Hi, my name is Maria Garcia. I'm a leader with SAC Act and I want you to vote yes on AB 1157.

Elvia Vasquez with Sacramento Act. Please pass AB 1157.

Mick Gunderson with Sacramento Area Congregations Together, please vote yes on AB 1157.

Peter Bishop, also with SAC act here in Sacramento. I fully support AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Victoria Nyack. I'm a native of San Diego. I'm a member of the California Association of Realtors as well as a member of ACE and I support this Bill because I'm scared of what inflation is doing to our country. Thank you.

Zachary Murray with the Alliance of California for Community Empowerment Action. Also, on behalf of Tenants Together Public Council, the Strategic Alliance for Just Economy and the Leadership Council, we strongly urge you to vote yes on AB 1157. Cap the rent at 5%.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Reverend Ray Huang. I'm a pastor in Los Angeles and also here representing Housing Now. Also Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability, Debt Collective and West Side Vision Coalition in Los Angeles. We urge you to vote yes strongly on AB 1157. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Diana Patterson. I'm with Sacramento Act and I urge you to vote yes on AB 1157.

Hello, my name is Shirley Oliver. I'm with Richmond ACE. And please be smart and pass AB 1157. We really need homes. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Doye Perkins. I'm from Oakland, California. I'm with Housing and Support of Human Rights and I'm support of AB 1157.

Adriana Martinez, Oakland ACE. Nobody should choose between food, medicine or housing. And children should not be on the streets. Thank you.

Hello everyone. Patty Shaw from SAC Act. I live in Sacramento and I strongly support AB 1157. Thank you.

Good morning. To God be the glory. My name is Jesus Figueroa Cacho. I am here. I'm an ACE member and I'm here to support AB 1157. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Benjamin Henderson. I'm with the Western Center on Law And Property and the Western center supports AB 1157.

California.

Good afternoon everyone. My name is Anaida Gomez, I live in Richmond and I'm here to support AB 1157.

Hi, Banais is Irma Beltran. I'm a supporter AB 1157. My daughter is in the school, Santa Cruz University. Please help us and I support it now.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Milan and I came from Richmond, California and I support 1157.

Hello, my name is Ramon Saldivar. I'm a homeowner from San Diego to voice my support for the Bill. Thank you.

Good morning, I'm Lesray Evany with Housing absolutely Is a Human Right and I'm in support of AB157.

Good morning. Giovanna Fajardo with ACE in Contra Costa in the Bay Area. My parents are landlords and I help them manage their properties and they wanted to let you guys know that they're also in support as I am as well.

Tran Nguyen with ACE. I live in Buffy Wicks' district and I strongly support AB 1157.

Good morning. My name is Myron Paez, I live in Pasadena, California. I was one mile away from the Eton Fire. Over 15,000 people lost their home. Many of them are my family. I have support for AB 1157. That's the least you can do. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Alicia DeAnst, I'm a social worker and with Sacramento Area Congregations Together strongly supporting the Bill.

Good morning. My name is Tere Flores Onofre with Sacramento Act in Pico, California and urge you to support AB 1157.

Good morning. Lucero Soto with Sacramento Act in Pico, California. Please vote yes on 1157. Thank you.

I'm Hazel Watson with Sacramento ACT in Pico, California and I support 11 AB 1157. Thank you.

Andy Kramer with SAC Act. I support.

Sherry Patrick from Sacramento. I'm from also a member of Sacramento Act and I am in full support of 1157.

Elsa Chinea Stevens, I won't bore you with all the organizations I belong to, but I am a member of the United Methodist Church. I'm here with Pico and with ACE. Please. Yes on 1157.

I'll still be standing here in case anyone needs interpretation, but my name is Edith Pastrano. I'm a resident of Richmond, California and I'm in support of AB 1157.

Eddie Carmona, PICO California in strong support of AB 1157.

My name is Diana Loza, car support level 57. Thank you.

Good morning Assembly Members. Valeria, community organizer with Faith in Action, East Bay and PICO, California. I I urge you to vote yes on AB 1157. That's what your your voters need and your residency lower rents to survive. Thank.

Good morning, My name is Grace Martinez. I'm the Deputy Director of California ACE asking you to support AB 1157.

Good morning, my name is Melvin Willis. I'm a lead campaign organizer in Contra Costa ACE and urging you to support AB 1157. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Anya Sivano. I live in Buffy Wicks' district and I urge you to support AB 1157. Be brave and do what's right.

I'm Valerie Batchelor, School Board Director for Oakland Unified. I'm here in support of 1157 on behalf of the 2400 unhoused families and over the 35,000 students that we serve in our district. If you support young people and their working families, you will vote yes on this bill.

My name is Darlene Simpson. I'm from San Diego. County. I'm priced out and I want you to vote yes on this Bill. We really need it. Thank you.

Hi, good morning everyone. My name is Maria Abrounes, I'm from Los Angeles and I'm a member of ACE. What I'm here today is just to ask you, please keep people stay in their houses. We already have too many homeless people. I am homeless and I need a house and we need this vote SB 1157. Thank you.

Good morning Ash Kalra, chair people. My name is Jeff Tara. I'm an advocate. I'm in support of this bill. I also represent to the committees of Cara, California Alliance, Retirement, Dogfight, Disability Effort, other disability organizations. Please consider what is going on and correct this problem. Native of Sacramento, but also lived in Los Angeles for more than 20 years.

Good morning everyone. My name is Alberto Parra and I'm here from Oakland, California and I'm here to ask for your support for AB 1157.

Hello, my name is Shay Dalott and I'm here from Alliance for Californians for Community Empowerment asking you to support 1157.

Hello, my name is Phoebe Dalot. I'm also with ACE and I'm in support of AB 1157.

My name is Kaohee Tao from Sacramento representing the Organization Long Innovating Politics in strong support. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Jose Lopez Aino. I'm with ACE. I'm also a trustee for the South Bay Union Elementary School District. I drove 10 hours to be here today from San Diego because the rent is too damn high.

Hi, good morning. My name is Danny Acevedo from Los Angeles ACE and I urge you to support working class families and not paid actors. By passing AB 1157. Thank you.

Good morning. Angelica Kabande representing Somkan and Rep. SF from San Francisco and the Fierce Coalition from San Jose, Louisiana, Sacramento and San Francisco. And we are urging you to support AB 1157. Thank you.

Good morning. David Sharples with the community group ACE. I urge you to support AB 1157, cap rents and keep people housed. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Monica Madrid. I am a renter of invitation homes which is not counted by through AB 1482. Also, on behalf of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA and on behalf of the California Democratic Party Renters Council in support.

Hello. Faith Lee with Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California. We're proud to support. Thank you.

Hello everyone, My name is Marcus. I am with ACE Oakland. And it is important for you all. To support AB 1157. It'll protect our communities. Thank you.

It.

Good morning, Chair. Members. Kate Bell, on behalf of the California Mental Housing Association, Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles in opposition. Thank you,

Chair and Members. Pat Moran, with Aaron Reed and associates, representing the Southern California Rental Housing Association, opposed to the bill. Thank you.

Please, no hissing.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members. Mark Smith, on behalf of the Apartment Association of Orange County, the Berkeley Property Owners Association, the East Bay Rental Housing Association, the NorCal Rental Property Association, the North Valley Property Owners Association, the Santa Barbara Rental Property Association, and the Small Property Owners of San Francisco, in opposition. Thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Skyler Wannacott with the California Business Properties Association and our Members, BOMA California and NAOP, California, in opposition.

Mr. Chair, we're getting that translator.

Hello. My name Oily. AB 1157. No.

I am Jung Way Young. No on AB 1157.

I'm Jay Funliouge. No on AB 1157. All right.

I am Sung Lu La, No AB 1157. Thank you.

5117.

I'm Toy Bo. No. AB 1157.

Hello. My name is Yen Yong Yu. No. AB 1157.

My name is AB 1157. Thank you. Thank you.

AP 1157.

My name is Xiang Hong. No. AB 1157.

I'm Sung Jung Lee. No. AB 1157. Thank you. Thank you.

No 1 AB 11.

No. AP 1157.

Yeah. I am AB 1157.

Make it short.

Thank you. Thank you.

I'm T. No. 1157.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. You stay here.

Okay.

Tell them no. Name. Yeah. Yeah. Name and no. Okay. Name and no. Like a man.

Im Jung Lu sefu, no.

Okay. My name is. No.

Thank you.

Siaoyu, No.

Quncai Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah. I am Kaiseng Wu. No.

My name is Jifan Mao. And no 1157. Thank you.

My name is Non AB 1157. Thank you. No rental control.

Yu Fung Leung. No.

Okay. Thank you. How much? I can go.

My name AB 1157.

1157. No.

No.

Junting Tan, No, AB 1157.

Thank you. Oh, thank you.

I'm Su Yung Tan, no.

1157. Okay.

Thank you.

Hi. My name is Mayna Young, President of Business and Housing Network with thousands of immigrant small property owners. Please vote no on AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Jennifer Liu. I'm with Bahn Business and Housing Network. Please say no to AB 1157. Rent control kills Housing supply.

My name is Dan. I'm the board Member of Bahn. We need solution code. Let's cut rate of tape, stabilize cost and respect the low water uphill. Together we can build a California where tenant and province thrives. Please say no to AB11457.

Thank you.

Skyler Wanaka, on behalf of the California Business Roundtable in opposition.

Okay.

My name is Lily Lee. I want everybody to say no for the 1157.

Thank you.

Noni Richen, board Member of Small Property Owners of San Francisco. Please note, please no vote on this housing killer. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. I am Korean. No AP 1157. Thank you. Thank you.

I thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

My name is Lee Chen, no.

Thank you.

My name is Mi Jian Chen and no on AB 1157.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Kimberly Wong. I am also a renter myself. No on 1157.

Hello, I'm Matthias Bunge and I am opposed to AB 1157. Thank you.

No, my name is. No on AB 1157.

Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Zhuri Ni. Now on AB 1157.

Yvonne Fernandez on behalf of the California Labor Federation, SEIU and AFSCME all in support. Thank you.

Amy Cho at the California Teachers Association in support.

Ruth Sosa Martinez on behalf of Power California Action. Representing over 15,000 members across the state in support.

Kristen Nimmers, on behalf of the California Black Power Network. A coalition of 44 organizations including the Los Angeles Black Worker Center, SoCal Black Worker Hub, Pillars of the Community, Rise Center, Scope, Community Interventions, SE Justice Group, Safe Return Project, COPE, Social Justice Learning Institute, Healing Justice San Bernardino and Alliance San Diego in strong support.

Crystal Mendoza with Starting Over, Inc. in here for support.

Hello. Denise Ferguson, representative with Starting Over Inc. And with California Black Power Network. I'm in support.

My name is K From San Francisco. Stop. AP 11:57 is killing the housing.

Thank you.

My name is Jang Lee and no 1157.

Hello, my name is Yuxing Moi. AB 1157. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Becky Lee. No on AB 1157. Thank you.

No, my name is no AP 1157.

Thank you.

My name is Lindy Kong. No. 1157. Thank you.

My name is no 1157.

I am no on AB 1157.

Hello, my name is G. Please say no on AB 1157. Thank you.

Hi. Hi. My name Winnie Fong. Please no on AB 1157. Thank you.

I am Kevin Kwan. Say no to AB 1157. Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Tommy Tran. I'm saying no on this AB 1157. Thank you very much.

Hi, my name is Anne Tang. I would like to say no on AB 1157.

Hello, my name is Gary All. Please. No on AB 1157. Thank you.

Hello, I am Carmen Liu. No on AB 1157. Thank you.

Hello, I am Sundew. No on 1157. Thank you.

My name is Jen Guang Law. AB 1197. Thank you.

Hello, no 1157.

Yeah.

Thank you.

My name Devon Zhang, no 1157.

Hello, my name is Sasha Riti Hernandez. I am a renter in Oakland, California, and I'm here on behalf of the 2,400 on house people that we have in our city and as well as our students who are actually victims of on House. And one. One of the things that I want to say is that. Oh, I support.

Okay, thank you.

No. Yeah.

Thank.

No.

Thank you. And no.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Tina Seng Kumaro. I'm a small property owner. I want to. Please say no to AB 1157. Thank you.

I am Chong Cheng Wu. AB 1157. No, no.

Thank you.

I am so.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Yun Chao, no AB 1157.

No AB 1157.

I'm Judy. No AB 1157.

I'm Sandy Su. Now on AB 1157.

I am wrong. No AB 1157.

No AP 1157. No AB 1151.

Helen Lee G. AB 1157. No.

My name is Mei Xiao Zhu. No AB 1157.

AB 1157

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, my name is Annie, no and AB 1157. Thank you.

Shirley Yang. No on AB 1157.

Good morning, Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Sydney Fong. I am from Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders for Civic Empowerment. I am a speaker of Cantonese, and I've spoken with many of these folks in the red shirts, and they are being absolutely misled.

They want the red to be lower, and they're being misled by the Permanent Association.

Hello. My name, Sirlee Wong. No on AP 1157, please. Thank you. Thank you.

My name is Mimi Wei. No 1157.

Thank you.

My name is Cecilia Ing. Please Vote no on AB 1157.

Thank you.

Bill Kwan. Vote no on AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Shim. No AB1157 Thank you.

I am.

Thank you. More. No, no, no.

1157.

My name is Alex Ku. No on AB 1157. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Peter. Yeah. I vote for no. AB 1157. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Oni Choi. I will say no on AB 1157. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Patrice Shang Nguyen and Please no on AB 1157. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Karen Mai. No on AB 1157. Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Steed On. I'm a small property owner and I am no on AB 1157. Thank you.

Okay. My name is Han Huang Zhou. Thank you.

My name is ping Chou He, no 1157. Thank you.

My name is Ching Lim, No AB 1157.

My name is 115. My name is Aning Wong and no on AB 1157.

Hi, my name is Stephen and no on AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Seng Ping Lin. I am from Bend in San Francisco on AB 1157.

Thank you.

My name is Lisa Sang from San Francisco. I just want you to vote note on 1157. And I want you guys to know that we also work hard for our money. Our money is not coming from the sky.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Min Li from Sacramento. Please vote no on AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Ellen Li Zhao. I am from San Francisco. The business housing network and Matt Henley work for the people, not for the deep state. Save California. No to 1157.

Thank you.

My name is Malia. I'm from Sacramento, known on AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Tana. I am from Sacramento, known on AB 1157. Thank you. Thank you.

Gina C. Louie, San Francisco. Please vote no on AB 1157. Thank you.

My name is Helen Wu from San Francisco. Small property owner. Please vote on no on AP1157. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Mary Jung from San Francisco. I'm a small property owner and I'd like you to vote no on AB 1157. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Divya Shiv with Housing California. I'm also speaking on behalf of the National Alliance to End Homelessness, Corporation for Supportive Housing and the Bring California Home Coalition in support. Thank you.

Amy Hines-Shaikh representing Unite Here, Local 11. And there are 32,000 folks in LA, Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside counties. Proud supporters and co sponsors. Thank you.

Hi. Michelle Pariset with Public Advocates, Proud co sponsors in strong support. Also a landlord.

Good morning. My name is Charlie Goss. I'm with the San Francisco Apartment Association. On behalf of our 3,000 Members who own or manage approximately 90,000 apartments, single family homes and condos in San Francisco, we ask for Your no vote. Thank you.

Good Morning. Jonathan Cook, Executive Director with the Sacramento Housing Alliance and support.

Good morning. I'm Zoinerbach with the Sacramento Housing Alliance, in support.

Matthew Bungie with Inner City Law Center and Skiddor in Los Angeles and strong support.

Hello, my name is Emily. I am with the Oakland Tenants Union. Please support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Elisa Lee. I live here in Sacramento. I'm a Member of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment. I'm also a small landlord and Strong support of AB 1157.

Hi, my name is Robert Koppel. I'm an ACE Member here in Sacramento and part of CA SSI coalition. Strong support.

Hi, my name is Tina Wong from in San Francisco. Please vote no on AB 1157. Thank you. We have about 500 Members.

Thank you.

All right, we're back.

All right. Well, thank you, everyone. We're now going to close a public comment. I want to thank everybody who joined us and who expressed their position. I know folks came, many folks came from far to be here. And we really do appreciate all of you being a part of this and sharing your position.

I'm now going to bring it back to the Committee and offer the opportunity for Members of the Committee to make comments or questions. And also I know we have the. We have, you have your witnesses and. Okay, so we have witnesses from both support and opposition here as well if we want to direct any questions via them.

Ms. Farias, thank you.

Want to scroll over to my seat?

Thank you, Chair and I want to thank the author for this bill. Really appreciate the thought and I know that it comes from a very deep space of all of us caring. So, I appreciate you and appreciate everyone that's here today in the testimony.

As someone who has spent 30 years in affordable housing and community development and as someone who grew up in a single parent household living in poverty, I deeply understand the diverse urgent needs of California's most vulnerable communities. But let's be honest. We're not just facing a housing crisis.

We are confronted with a poverty crisis, an education crisis and the consequences of decades of failed public policy at the local, state and federal level. Our higher wage careers, our education model has failed to prepare generations of children for higher wage careers, leaving families trapped in cycles of poverty with few pathways out.

It's easy to point the fingers, but the truth is the crisis did not happen overnight. Where was the public outcry when the Department of Housing and Urban Development quickly slashed housing subsidies? Subsidies that created affordable housing opportunities for the most vulnerable: our seniors, our disabled adults.

Where were we in the state outcry to the federal government to help our most vulnerable? Where was the accountability when the cities enacted inclusion exclusionary zoning laws and onto housing policy that stifled development and locked out families of opportunity? Today, California has inherited an accumulative failures of generations.

To make meaningful progress, we must be strategic, outcome driven and honest about what truly makes housing affordable housing. Housing construction is not free, and the conversation must shift on how we responsibly finance a full spectrum of housing that meets the diverse needs of all Californians.

While I understand the intent behind this bill, I cannot support a policy that ultimately causes more harm than good. There are two critical reasons.

You need to leave; that's wrong.

Rent control reduces housing supply. When landlords are unable to debt service their loans. It discourages construction, lending housing and the maintenance of existing rental units. Some may convert properties to other uses entirely tightening up the housing supply and driving up rents across the board. 2: tt limits access for lower income families.

Rent controlled units are often occupied by long term tenants regardless of tenants changing financial situation. This locks out families that we are truly trying to serve.

When people are not able to release an affordable housing unit and move up the housing economic ladder, we are holding up an inventory that other vulnerable families need in the State of California. This bill, while well intentioned, risk creating unintended consequences and deepening very crisis that we're trying to solve.

I cannot support a measure that puts long term affordability and access at further risk. We need to be bold, smart, equitable solutions need to be delivered, not policies that repeat mistakes of the past. I know my words may not resonate to you all at the moment because you've come from so many spaces of the State of California.

But I assure you, as someone who has dedicated my life to advocating for the most vulnerable in this space, and as a child of immigrant grandparents, and as a child that grew up in public housing and was a beneficiary of affordable housing, I understand this space well.

I've practiced in this space, and I've been on that side of the dais advocating when it fell on deaf ears. And again, I've spent 30 years in this space advocating with passion as you all are here today, and you all sent me to the Sacramento to bring my expertise here.

And I am happy to work with all of my colleagues and especially the author to find the path forward to addressing the housing crisis in California. We must rectify the lack of building of our aging population, in particular our seniors. We must hold the Federal Government accountable.

We must push forward a housing bond that creates a financing tool. If we do not have a financing tool to create affordable housing programs. These are not the policies that help create more opportunity for us all.

From first time home buyers to entry level homes, to affordable rental to our aging parents that need long term housing.

And I appreciate all of us being respectful in this space that we may agree or disagree, but I am confident with our Chair and this committee that we are going to find a path forward for the State of California.

Thank you. Mr. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be moving the bill today as a proud co-author of AB 1157 because frankly, the rent is too damn high. As one of the 10 now much larger renters caucus, when I started, I was one of the few only renters in the legislature.

I understand crucially how important it is now to have stability in the rental market today. Stability. And that's what this measure is about is having stability in the marketplace. I can't tell you how many different landlords I've had, whether it be corporate, which I don't really prefer, or real mom and pop landlords who I do prefer.

And when I do talk to my mom-and-pop landlords, they don't know that their rental restrictions, their laws of them change based on the age of their unit, the type of their house, the tape of their home or where the jurisdiction is. It is an unworkable Swiss cheese patchwork for mom-and-pop landlords.

And if we actually care about mom-and-pop landlords, who I believe are in a better position to form real relationships with their tenants, you need to give them - we need to give them certainty and stability.

Because I have the good fortune of renting a single-family home, which is why that part of the bill is very important to me to make sure that there is rent stability. And many of those landlords don't understand there's so much variance in the marketplace. But too often I think something is ominously beeping right now.

But too often, I think, mom-and-pop landlords are thrust upon the stage as props for the corporate landlords who abuse the system especially. There's a different bill I'm working on in the single-family home marketplace where they can jack up rent from one contract to the next at 100, 200%.

The bedrock of the American dream, less than 100 years ago, was the fixed mortgage, the fixed term mortgage in American homeowners. They could understand instability for 30 years to pay the same amount of money to the bank, essentially, in a way, a landlord.

But when it comes to a renter, one year to another, a month to another, or a different lease to another, you have no stability. And that is one of the big daggers that hangs over renters' heads.

Especially on my own, even though I make a decent salary as state legislator, I fear that the rent in my hometown in San Jose, which is one of the most expensive places in the world right now, will go up so precipitously that I cannot even catch up.

So, I do think that the reforms the TPA presents today are very common sense, very necessary. One is to preserve it for longevity, not to have it expire just in a couple of years and to also still say that you still can increase the rent, but it's a modest rate of return.

I do believe that there is a modest rate of investment that people put in. If there is, I'm very sympathetic to my Chinese aunties and uncles who put these investments in a duplex or a couple of houses that they used to have and now they rent them with a 10% year over year increase.

Honestly, most of our salaries do not grow 10% every year. They do not grow that fast, but I think is more than a reasonable amount of rate of return for them. And that's why I'm so proud to be a co-author on this bill.

I'm proud of co-author's leadership on this issue and I will moving the bill today and proudly voting yes on this bill. Thank you.

Assemblymember Wicks.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and thank you to the author for bringing this forward. I always appreciate your good work in housing, and I appreciate your commitment to our working-class communities because I know it is nothing but driven by your passion for making sure our working-class communities are able to thrive in California.

Not just survive but thrive. I also want to thank everyone who came up here to testify and to speak. And I know many of you came from far and near. And I think we can all agree the rent is too damn high. I think we all know that.

I think the question is, how do we solve this problem? That is really the fundamental question; I think we grapple with every day in this committee, and I got elected in 2018 and I was a joint author of AB 1482, which was the original bill that was put forth. Now, this was a very diverse coalition of lawmakers.

We had progressives and moderate lawmakers. We had heavy engagement from the Governor personally on that deal. We had leadership from both houses with a very intensely crafted deal.

And a deal that was really thoughtfully aimed, I think, at trying to stop the most egregious rent gouging, rent gouging that we were seeing in our communities that was taking place towards our tenants while still trying to ensure that we weren't going to harm housing production, which I think is a really important element that I want to talk about here in a second.

You know that that deal involved the Apartment Association, ACE, SEIU, CBIA, realtors. I mean, it was the spectrum of people that are in this space. Having been a joint author on that, I share the concern that we are renegotiating that deal.

So, I wanted to ask the author for your commitment to bring all of those stakeholders to the table to try to craft a deal that everyone can live with as we move forward and making sure that everyone is at the table as these conversations progress, should the bill get out today.

I want to thank you for the question.

It's my first of many, by the way. So just -

Yeah. And of course, your great leadership in this space. Absolutely. Look, you know, I did meet with opposition before we even dropped the language on this bill just to demonstrate that the door is open.

And so, if this bill were to get to this committee, I hope that, you know, we can continue to talk about the different elements of being put forth in this legislation so that we can see if there's some common ground that we can find.

Okay. You know, this bill has five more years until it sunsets. Sunsets in 2030. And I was looking through the analysis, you know, and I say this as someone who tried to get a rental registry passed for three years and couldn't.

So, I understand the sort of lack of data that's out there, but is there any academic research showing the efficacy of 1482 that you have that we've seen to date?

I'm not aware of the academic research. I'm aware of the data that we do have now showing the rent increases for 2019 to current day. And those rent increases are astronomical. And I think partly because of what's happened since post pandemic. And so, if the effort was to stabilize rents, it hasn't worked.

So, one of the - the rent is too damn high. It is also too damn hard to build in California. You know, housing production from my - I'm like a one trick pony. I'm like, we've got to make it easier to build more housing in California.

And has been really my sole focus since I've been here because it has just been too difficult. You know, we have spent a lot of time sort of dismantling the myriad of roadblocks that we've put up over decades that have created the problem that we are in. That has been my primary focus.

It is my primary focus because all of our communities suffer because of the lack of housing stock that is available. Both subsidized, low income, moderate market rate, all of the above. That's why I focused on that we are 2.5 million homes shy of where we need to be.

I'm concerned that elements of this bill could exacerbate our housing production concerns and have some potential negative unintended consequences in that vein. So, I want to voice that concern and go on the record with that because I really look at things through that lens. So, I'm well aware of the housing production concerns that we have put forth.

And so, I share that concern. So, I want to ask, as you're going through those conversations with that in mind, I'm concerned with reducing the cap by so much. Is that going to spook folks who say, you know what, I'm just not going to build in California. Why would I when I can go somewhere else?

And we hear about that. So, I want to flag that many families are priced out of California and are leaving California and they're actually going to state where rent control is illegal, but the housing is cheaper there because we've made it easier to build and there's much more housing stock.

And so that's where this sort of like balancing act, I think is something that has to be really thoughtfully done. And I think that's what 1482 was. Right. And so, I just want to urge caution as we move forward in that regard because I do think that is our original sin in the state.

The other thing I want to note is that voters have had the opportunity to vote on this and have voted it down on three separate occasions, including even in my own district last year. I also want us to be attuned to where the electorate is when we think about these issues. I supported Senator Durazzo's bill.

I was a joint author on the original. I supported Senator Durazzo's bill. I have pushed every single year since I've been here for more money for affordable housing because I know our working-class communities need it desperately. We need more public investments in affordable housing, and I'm committed to that. I do share concerns about this bill.

I also recognize that we are in the first committee of the first house. I'm going to give you my vote today, Mr. Kalra, to move the bill forward, but with a lot of these really big concerns I have moving forward as this bill progresses.

And I welcome conversation from other stakeholders that are present here or who are not and who are trying to figure out if they want to weigh in. Because if we are going to be passing seismic shift on housing policy, we need all the stakeholders to be at the table.

And I really want data around housing production because if I think that this impacts housing production, I'm going to have a lot of concerns moving forward. But I want to give you the shot, Mr. Kalra, to see if you can work through some of those details, because I do believe in you as an author and I know where your heart is coming from. And so, I want to honor that. But I also want to be very transparent with you about my concerns.

Thank you.

Ms. Quirk-Silva.

I concur with my colleagues on both points of views. I think this is exactly where we are in California with very different viewpoints, which is why we have seen nationally such a polarization of conversation and opinion. So, whether it's housing or mass deportation or affordability, we simply don't agree.

And yet I think we can do two things at once. We can find common ground in both sides of the argument. So, as I listen to my colleague here and my colleague there, there's points that resonate on both sides. I have a high regard for my colleague and the work he's done on this housing committee.

And so, it is a difficult decision. I know that I've now - I was actually vote number 41, I believe, in 2019 for the AB 1482. And that was a difficult decision even then. And yet as a body, we've continued to say we have to move forward in housing, we have to look at affordability.

We know that for too many, they are working not only one job but two job and it's still not making ends meets as far, as not only their rent but everything else. Groceries, gas, all of these things are contributing to a quality of life that fills like I'm just not getting ahead, I'm not moving forward.

And so yes, we do see people leaving our state, but we also have to look at, we have pushed and pushed on housing production. We have battled with our local municipalities, with our advocacy groups, from the League of Cities to the realtors to the Apartment Association, all of them.

And I will say, and I might get in big trouble for this, but I've been in trouble before. First of all, if you are an advocate on either side, you have to come and talk to us. Because I've had almost no meetings on this bill that have been requested to my team or me.

And I've been sitting on this committee for a very long time. A text message is not a communication. So, for anybody out there, that's not how I respond. Secondly, this is a big, big bill and it's important and it can affect lives. So, with that, I have spoken to the author about my concerns.

My concerns are the single-family exemption. Understanding that we have some really good players in the market out there that have these smaller units. They don't choose to raise the rent to the maximum. They work with the people who are renting with them. Some of them are long term renters.

And then we also have some small owners that don't do that. So again, in the middle there's always the stories on both sides. But I would ask you as the author to really look at that part of the bill that does concern me. And it concerns me because on the small owners, this is their nest egg.

And this is where we are seeing this market so volatile and every investment people make, we've seen go up and down. I'll reveal I'm at the retirement age and I am looking at what's happening in the market.

So, any investment is an important investment, and we need to respect that as investors, whether it's having two units or four units, this very much is an important part of their livelihood, and we haven't seen the recoveries in the pandemic. So, with that, I would definitely say that is my concern.

I know the author has ensured me that he will continue to work on this as it goes through the next committees. I, like my colleague, will move this out of the committee and yet continue to look for some type of common work that can be done. Not that's going to make everybody happy. Let's be clear.

We're not all going to leave these rooms happy, but at least that there's a little bit more accommodation towards the center so we can get to a point where it doesn't feel like one side wins and the other side doesn't. I think we can do it, but it's hard.

I'm in many committees where that's the goal and it doesn't always happen that. But with that, I think there was a motion made that I heard. I will second that.

Ms. Wilson.

Thank you to the author. I always appreciate your thoughtfulness in terms of the legislation that you craft and how you work through that legislation. And so, although I disagree philosophically on this issue and we've had a couple of conversations around that, it doesn't take away my respect for you and where I know your intentions are.

Really, it is because there is, and I think every single person on this committee can agree, that we have a housing crisis in California. I think that's part of why every person on this committee, I'm sure, requested to serve on this committee as it relates to that.

And in particularly, we have a rental crisis in the sense that rent is high. And it's been said by a few folks and a few different ways. And so how do you deal with rent? For me, it's basic economics. It's supply and demand. The best way to suppress prices is to increase supply.

And so, we in California have to do that and work through our issues of production. I am finding this conversation in 2025 around, around our constituent senses of the economy and their needs to be very alarming.

And we as a legislature have grappled with this conversation around what we know the people in our communities are experiencing in terms of increased cost of living.

But I also know that over the decades as a legislature in California, we have, and you see it in the effects of our policies, that we have created an environment that makes California a risky investment. We are the Golden State, and in a lot of ways it doesn't appear like we're acting golden.

And so, I'm very much concerned on this particular issue that we are not addressing. What is the housing crisis? What is the price crisis? Not only for housing, but I'm sorry, not only for rentals but for ownership by dealing with basic economy, increased production. We have the shortage of housing.

And capping rent doesn't fix that, it exacerbates it. We've seen this. Data shows it. There's been research and studies about this, and if I had known that there were not any presented, I would have literally referenced some for my colleagues. Some say that this will cause a person who owns a home, "Well, they can just sell it."

I've heard some of my colleagues say that to other colleagues. Well, they could just sell their house. Well, that doesn't create housing. That just changes who lives there. It doesn't create housing. It also, I think, causes a housing quality issue.

It lowers the incentives for people to upgrade property and it also can prevent people from doing timely maintenance where you have people living in squalor and the housing quality just goes down and down and down. And guess what? People don't leave. Why? Because they have a rent fix.

So, they're not leaving those houses to upgrade to other housing because now the price is capped. So, what incentive do I have to go move somewhere else?

Even if moving somewhere else might be better for me because rent is so expensive and because we're not producing the level of housing that we absolutely know that we need to produce, we continue, I think, through some of our policies and we're seeing it in real time.

And I am someone who absolutely loves this state, supports the state, wouldn't want to live anywhere else because my family was a military family. We have lived outside of the state and was happy when we got back. We are saying on a whole host of fronts, not just on the housing issue, that California is a risky investment.

And so, because of that reasons, and you already know this, that I can't support this going forward. And yes, this is the first house, this is the first committee.

I think this is things, if you want to adjust this to have those conversations, and this is one because it's so critical that the discussion happens to come with a pretty much baked deal, but it's not even close because we have single family housing in there, which we know wasn't a part of the original deal, shouldn't be a part of this deal, but yet found its way to this, this committee.

It's disconcerting to me that we are furthering this discussion on this particular issue when there's still five years left and there's nothing that the data is showing, nothing that the original deal worked to reduce housing. I mean, housing costs, I'm sorry, rent costs. It has not demonstrated that it worked.

I think there needs to be additional discussion, and I don't think it should be one where there's a legislative vehicle. I think there should be some homework done to figure out how to solve this particular issue if you want to use a capped approach, which I disagree with.

So, I don't buy into, "Well, this is the first house, this committee. Let the conversation continue to go," because I think the conversation has already started on the right track. Rock track. Excuse me. Thank you.

Mr. Patterson.

Great. Thank you. Well, Assemblymember, I'm sure you weren't expecting me to support this bill, but I do appreciate, you know, your- I mean, obviously we've worked on this committee for a while, and I know that we share a lot of similar views on needing to, you know, make housing more affordable. I really appreciate the work.

I love this committee. I mean, I swear, people are always like, "Joe, why do you want to be on housing committee?" I really have loved this committee, and I've had the honor to serve as Vice Chair for the last three years. And we've done some good things.

We've come together as Republicans and Democrats to try to help with housing affordability. And some of the most successful, kind of a sidetrack, but some of the most successful measures of affordability in government programs that we have in California have perpetually been proposed to be cut and defunded by Governor Newsom.

And it's always kind of interesting because we have all this talk in almost every Committee and actually shocked. I don't think it's come up today about what Trump is doing nationally.

But just make no mistake that Governor Newsom last year and this year again, has proposed cutting the most successful housing programs that California has had year in and year out. And now, fortunately, this legislature has put the funding back in and local governments are helping, are getting some housing off the ground, fortunately, because of those programs.

I grew up my entire life in rental housing. My parents never owned a home, don't own a home. My mom still rents. Yeah. Right now, she lives in senior affordable housing, which is an opportunity that's not available to everyone. And I wish we had more of it.

And part of the reason is because we have serious market and government forces that cause housing prices to increase. For every mandate the state and local governments put on housing, prices go up. For every mitigation fee, prices go up. For every additional bond that passes locally, prices go up.

And I don't know what to say, but in terms of, you know, rent control in general, the voters have consistently said, we don't want rent control. In 2018, 59% of voters voted against rent control. 2021, 60%. And just a couple days ago, maybe we just finished counting ballots, seems like 62% of voters voted against rent control.

And I think in every single legislative district in the state voted against rent control. So, I take that pretty seriously. So, you know, no matter what happens in this building, I know the voters have spoken time and time and time and time again that they don't want rent control.

And, you know, I'm fortunate, you know, very thankful for my mom. She worked very hard to give me opportunities. Took out a lot of school loans that weren't forgiven, by the way, to go to college. I bought a house with my wife, our very first home.

And at one point, we had to make a decision to rent out that house because we had to move to actually, I think your district, Assemblymember, for a while. And when we were renting it out, I'll tell you, is a person who had all their assets wrapped up into that home.

It scared me to death to think about what would happen if something went wrong or even if my tenants didn't pay their month for one rent - their rent for one month. It would bankrupt me as an individual.

So, to think that we can cap rents when really that's the livelihood for a lot of the individual homeowners, it just doesn't - it doesn't really work. It's scary as a person who is in that situation.

And yes, there are a lot of financing tools that go into place for even the large corporations to make this work. So regrettably, I'm going to be opposing this measure today. Again, I don't think that comes as any surprise to you but appreciate everybody coming up here today and thanks for the time.

Mr. Tangipa.

Well, I know I just came a little bit late, but I also want to thank. This is my first time on the Housing Community Development Committee. Thank you. Great building here on the first one.

But again, I also want to thank the author for at least seeing that we've all got to take on the cost-of-living issue. And there are different ways on how we get there and what we want to take on.

But I also want to make sure I highlight the Assemblymember Wilson's comments because I think she put it so beautifully together. This is a supply and demand issue. This is something that I feel personally about because 10 years ago I was homeless. Now I own a home.

And now that home is a rental that I also rent out to other students. So that way they have an opportunity to have affordable rents and it's the most affordable rental in my opinion in the entire area where. But both Assemblymember Wilson and I are familiar with Fresno.

And you know, we've seen this again time and time again. Rent control has been put in different areas. Argentina had rent control for a long time and for the first time after removing rent control, their rents are now dropping because the market is coming in.

And I think that we need to focus on increasing supply because when people say we have a housing crisis, we have a housing availability crisis because we've strangled the market through regulation where people aren't able to build and invest.

And I really worry about with what's happening in the insurance market, with potentially home insurance increasing by 22% if you have State Farm and then increasing again on top of that, where the home owner and the landlord on that myself will be an exact position that Assemblymember Patterson was just talking about, that I won't be able to make the additional cost because I won't have the ability to potentially raise rates to provide that same housing. That the only thing I can do is liquidate.

I've only got my one house. I've helped my parents become first time homeowners. And I also believe that homeownership is the easiest way to break generational poverty. So, we've got to have access and to build more housing to really take on the cost of living and what you're trying to address.

I don't believe that this is the right pathway to get there. And I really just, I appreciate joining this committee because this is what where my business is at and how my life has been changed. And I think that there are different ways to get to the affordability crisis, to lower rent.

And I look forward to working on other solutions in the future.

All right, thank you all for those thoughtful comments. And with that I will pass it back to Mr. Kalra to close.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to all the colleagues. I didn't do a one-on-one response that I would just give a summation on some of the issues that were raised because they're all valid.

And I also like serving on this committee because it allows us to have really in-depth conversations and analysis on the most pressing issue in our state.

And a number of you up here have introduced, not just this year, but over the years, bills on production that I think are critically important are going to help us turn this massive ship around. And I fully support that. However, in the meantime, people are in crisis right now.

I understand as an immigrant who first lived in affordable housing as a baby and as a child to now, decades later. My father is a small pop landlord owning two single family homes that he rents out. That it is an opportunity for generational wealth and opportunity for those that are in poverty.

But let's remember those that are in poverty right now are the renters. Those that we say that we have, the number one issue to face is cost of living. Well, this the number one driver of cost-of-living issues. The number one expense for low-income families is the rent.

My father over several decades has never seen the need or desire to raise the rent more than 5% year over year in his life. And he's done just fine and made enough. He makes resources from those investments from the rent. So, we have firsthand experience as a family as to the impacts on small mom-and-pop landlords.

This bill, or the original TPA has a 15-year exemption on new rental housing that hits the market. And we all agree we need more supply. But supply can take several years, and it will take several years. And we're all on that mission to make it happen. In the meantime, people are suffering right now.

People want to see the data; the data is there and how much the rents have gone up over the last six years. I understand, I have great respect for the opposition. We work on a lot of stuff together in support and I know that they're representing important stakeholders in the conversation of housing supply and demand.

If you look at the list of supporters and opposition, 137 different organizations in support that represent a broad range of stakeholders representing the community and working people and labor, people that are truly struggling and suffering. And when we talk about this bill, it's not a rent control bill.

Rent control is something like they have in some form in San Francisco with the, I think a year over year, 1.7%, for example, in some of the units from 2024-2025. That's below cost of living increases. That means that whoever's renting that out as a landlord is not even necessarily making up for cost-of-living adjustments.

This is a rent stabilization bill that puts a cap on rent increases year over year. That's a big difference because a lot of the conversation has been on rent control. But that's not what this or the original TPA is about. It's about rent stabilization so that our families don't continue to get priced out of their homes.

Homelessness is on the rise. Family homelessness is on the rise. Homelessness of those with children on the rise. Senior homelessness is the number one reason or number one category of increases for our seniors and it's because they can't keep up with the rent and, and other expenses that are on their table.

And rent is the number one, that as you can see from the data in this wonderful staff analysis, has gone up so much more dramatically than anyone could have anticipated when the original TPA was put into place. Now, I understand that in the original TPA there was a sense that maybe for 10 years it would be revisited.

However, I would say two things to that. One, the conditions are far more severe than we could have expected because of the pandemic and post pandemic.

Two, with federal impacts, including getting rid of the federal rental assistance program this year, we know things are just going to get worse, not to mention the fires and so on and so on.

And three, almost everyone, I think Assemblymember Wicks and I as a joint author, I was a co-author to do the original bill may have been the only ones, and Assemblymember Quirk-Silva, that were here then. To say to legislators that you can't touch something for a decade because prior legislation has dictated that you can't.

It's just not how we should legislate, especially when there are changing conditions, which we do have here in this case. So, I really appreciate my colleagues for their thoughtful feedback. I'm listening, I'm hearing. These are things that I want to continue to work on, including with opposition and with our sponsors.

I do want to thank the Chair and members, everyone that came here to speak and support an opposition, including those that were interpreting for those in support, in opposition, to make sure everyone has access to this public space. And thank you to our sergeants for their great work.

And you know, we just, we just learned that we became the fourth largest economy in the world. That's not necessarily a badge of honor, if we have people that can't afford to live here, if we have people that are on the streets. Housing is a human right and that's what this legislation seeks to affirm for California.

With that respect, we ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Well, first of all, thank you, Mr. Kalra, for your leadership and for your thoughtful approach to this, for the commitments that you've made moving forward and for your leadership on housing more broadly. Mr. Kalra, you're a member of this committee.

Shortly you'll come back up here, and you've supported all of the efforts that this committee has taken, that the legislature has taken to confront this crisis. And I think what we've heard up here on the dais and from I'm sure everybody who was here with us today, an agreement that the rent in California is too high.

It is something that millions of Californians experience each month. We have nearly 50% of our renters who are cost burdened, spending over 30% of their income on rent and over a quarter that spend over 50% of their income on rent.

And I'm sure there are some folks who are thinking in their mind, I spend even much more than that. And it is something that we need to address, we need to confront, and we need to change.

We have a responsibility in this committee to take action to bring the rents down for Californians and to do it in a way that addresses the root causes of the issue. And so, yes, we need more housing.

We need affordable - we have huge housing shortage in our state, more affordable housing, much deeper investments, and we need to make sure that the protections that exist for tenants are adequate and are effective. And so, I certainly am a strong supporter of the Tenant Protection Act.

It was authored by my predecessor, Mr. Chu, along with many of the folks who are here. And there are a lot of questions, though, that you've heard up here and a lot of feedback about how best to do this and what we should do moving forward on this. And so, this is the first committee in the first house.

Next, it'll go to your committee and there's going to be a lot more conversations that you're going to have to have on this, including reflecting the folks here who are in many cases voting on this with a commitment that you address their concerns. And I want to appreciate that as well.

And also, that you work with the folks who have very valid concerns, in particular as it relates to the impact on housing production.

I think that's a consistent thing because for a lot of folks, they strongly believe, as you've heard, that this housing shortage is one that we also have to address as we protect the folks in the short term. So, I think it's a critical conversation.

I think it's an important conversation, particularly because of the urgency of what we're hearing from all of the folks who are here today. And it's one that I know you're going to move thoughtfully and collaboratively in confronting. So lastly, I again want to thank all of the people who came here today.

I know people had to take off work. I know they had to get childcare. I know they came from very long distances, some driving, many, many hours, flying here, both supporters and opponents.

Everyone here wants to see a California that is more affordable, where people can provide for their families where they can build generational wealth where they can have security in their home. And that's the mandate that we have here moving forward. So, with that, we'll take a roll call vote on the bill.

Motion is to pass to the Assembly Committee on Judiciary. [Roll Call].

7 to 5, that bill is out and on to Judiciary.

Thank you.

Thank you. It's not rent control, it's just cap the rent. That's it. $240 is too much. One year. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right. Oh, so I'll give it.

[Roll Call]

Okay, the consent calendar is out. Right now the vote is 9-0, and we'll leave that open. And we're now going to move to ACA 3 by the Chairman, Mr. Haney.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair and Members. I'm proud to present ACA 3, which will extend homeownership opportunities by requiring the University of California to make available a limited number of down payment loans to eligible UC support staff who are first time home buyers. California is experiencing a housing crisis.

Rising rents are reducing access to affordable apartments, home prices are skyrocketing, and down payments are becoming barriers to homeownership, even for older starter homes. Homeownership rates in California are the second lowest in the country. Many UC workers are especially struggling with housing costs, and the prospects of homeownership are becoming less likely every day.

With a median average of about $30 per hour, more than 2/3 of the employees meet the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development standard for low or very low income. For over 40 years, the UC has successfully managed self sustaining homeownership assistance.

Higher education institutions like the UC use affordable home loans and other products to recruit executives and faculty, and these include adjustable rate mortgages, second mortgages, and down payment assistance. These loans are funded by the UC Office of the President's Central Bank, while others are funded by campus discretionary funds. Down payments are often the greatest barriers to homeownership.

However, UC support staff do not have access to UC home ownership assistance programs. ACA 3 requires UC to make available a limited number of down payment loans to eligible UC support staff. Eligible support staff include all support staff employed at UC for at least five years and are first time home buyers with 75% of the loans prioritized for support staff with incomes below or at area median income.

Under this ACA, support staff do not become eligible for the more robust UC Home Low Interest Mortgage and Down Payment Grants Program available to executives and faculty. This is a modest approach that will make homeownership a reality for UC workers. It will also help to to improve recruiting and retaining UC staff.

Many of our University of California campuses are in very expensive areas. Folks are commuting long hours. This will allow them to stay closer to where their jobs are to continue to provide the service that they do to our state, to our patients, to our students.

And it is a critical, smart, and cost effective approach to expand homeownership opportunities for folks who deserve it. With me to testify in support of the bill is Michael Avant, President of AFSCME 3299. Liz Perlman, the Executive Director for AFSCME 3299, is available to answer any technical questions.

Great, thank you. Two minutes each.

Good afternoon, Chair and Committee Members. My name is Michael Avant, and I'm the President of AFSCME Local 3299 in support. In our state's constitution, Article 9, Section 9 requires the approval of the California voters before this workforce housing policy can take place. ACA 3 is a limited to long term UC support staff who are the first time home buyers with modest income, whether they are union or non-union. ACA 3 limits the number of down payment assistance loans.

ACA 3 doesn't give support staff everything that the UC Home Mortgage Program has given to executives and faculty for the last 40 years. But by using the same UC Short Term Investment Pool, ACA 3 won't impact students' tuition, taxpayers, or the General Fund. The shared appreciation framework guarantees UC will be repaid and make a fair return. We hope you will place this modest proposal on a ballot for the voters to decide.

Liz Perlman, Executive Director for AFSCME 3209. Just available to answer questions. Thank you.

That's what I'm talking about. All right. Are there any witnesses in opposition to this measure? Or should we take the me toos first? Okay. All right. Other... Sorry. Still a new guy here, you know, chairing committees. Okay. If there are any other witnesses in support, we will do name and affiliation only please.

This is Jeff Tartagia, an advocate in support of doing with what is very needed for keeping our UC system going.

Good afternoon. Teresa Ramos, I am in hospital billing at UC Irvine. I'm joined today by my co-workers in support of ACA 3.

Thank you.

Ivan Fernández, California Labor Federation, in support.

Good morning. Monica Martinez, clinical administrative clinic care partner at UCLA Medical Center, and I'm here joined by my co-workers in support of ACA 3.

My name is Jesse Hernandez. I'm senior cook from Riverside, and I'm here today in joint support with my co-workers in support of ACA 3.

Hello. I'm Kat Bedford. I'm from UC Berkeley, and I'm a groundskeeper, and I'm here in support with my co-workers for ACA 3.

My name is Francisco Garcia. I work for the University of Santa Barbara. I'm joined by my co-workers, and I'm here in support of ACA 3.

Hi. My name is Natisha Booker, environmental services worker for UC Davis. I'm joined today by my co-workers. Excuse me. In support of ACA 3. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Jason Haenel with AFSCME California in support.

My name is Timothy Chen. I'm an endoscopy technician from UCSF. I'm here today by my co-workers in support of ACA 3.

[Translated] Good afternoon. My name is Marta Aguado. I am a principal food service worker at UC Santa Cruz. I am here to support ACA 3. Thank you.

Linda Scott here. Patient dealer at UC San Diego. I'm here today. I'm joined with my co-workers here in support of ACA 3. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. All right, with no others. Now, we will take the primary. Are there any primary witnesses in opposition to this measure? All right, we'll have two minutes, please. Thank you.

Mr. Chair and Members. Jason Murphy on behalf of the University of California rising today in respectful opposition to ACA 3. We believe this bill is both unnecessary and represents a major shift from the University's core mission of teaching, research, and service.

As noted in your analysis, California already has a down payment loan program, exactly the same kind that ACA 3 would require, at the California Housing Finance Agency. Specifically, this is the California Dream for All Program. Asking the University of California to recreate the exact same program we believe is needless and inefficient use of public resources.

UC has been working with CalHFA, fortunately, for almost a year on an agreement to offer this precise type of program to our employees. CalHFA has been an eager and enthusiastic partner in developing this joint agreement, and the University and CalHFA are finalizing the implementation agreement now.

And we expect the complete agreement will be announced in the next few weeks. This arrangement will offer down payment assistance to UC employees and will serve as a model for collaboration and efficiency between state agencies. Importantly, this program will require a costly ballot measure, duplicative administrative structures at the University, or require even a policy bill.

As you know, the University of California is facing unparalleled threats and substantial budget cuts at both the state and federal levels. In addition, at the bargaining table, the University of California remains committed to our workforce. That's why we've been offering robust offers to our AFSCME employees to give workers competitive wages, benefits, and growth opportunities. For all the reasons stated above, the University remains opposed and asks for a no vote. Thank you.

Great. Thank you. Are there any other witnesses in opposition? Name and affiliation, please.

Sorry. In support. Tiffany Mok on behalf of CFT, representing UC lecturers and librarians, in support.

Good afternoon, Chair and Members. Catherine Charles on behalf of the Bay Area Council in respectful opposition.

Great, thank you. Seeing it, seeing no others, we'll bring it back up here. Assembly Member Kalra.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank Chair Haney for bringing this bill forward. As a co-author, would certainly like to move the bill. And I had a question. Assembly Member Haney, currently there is a program where UC helps us service the mortgages made to executives and faculty, is that right?

Yes.