A bill that would impose a rent freeze across Los Angeles and Ventura counties following the region’s fire-related state of emergency—an emergency that could remain in place indefinitely—is scheduled for a hearing in the Assembly Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, March 4.
AB 246 by Assemblyman Isaac G. Bryan, D-Los Angeles, would prohibit rent increases for 12 months after the governor lifts the emergency declaration tied to the Palisades and Eaton fires, and windstorm conditions. Because there is no set expiration for the emergency, the bill could effectively lock rental rates in place indefinitely. The measure would freeze rents at levels charged as of Jan. 7, 2025, and authorize district attorneys and city attorneys to enforce violations, imposing civil penalties of up to $10,000 per instance.
The California Apartment Association opposes AB 246, arguing that it goes beyond existing anti-price-gouging laws, which already cap rent increases at 10% during declared emergencies. The association contends that a full rent freeze would unfairly penalize all rental housing providers for the actions of a few bad actors.
Local officials have rejected similar proposals
Despite AB 246’s broad rent freeze provisions, the Los Angeles City Council declined to pass a similar policy, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors never proposed such a measure. The rejection by local officials raises questions about the necessity of this bill at the state level.
Housing availability at risk
In a letter to Assemblyman Bryan, CAA and other industry groups warned that a yearlong rent freeze could exacerbate the housing shortage by discouraging property owners from offering rental housing.
“By freezing rents for 12 months, AB 246 will inadvertently reduce the availability of housing,” the letter states. “Property owners who might otherwise consider renting out a room, accessory dwelling unit, or a second home may decide against doing so due to the increased risks and financial constraints imposed by this legislation.”
Lessons from COVID-19 and rising costs
CAA’s letter also highlights the lasting financial strain that property owners faced under pandemic-era restrictions.
“For nearly five years, rents were capped while costs continued to climb for property owners,” the letter states. “Many landlords lost their properties as they struggled to cover local government fees, taxes, soaring insurance premiums, and maintenance costs with limited rental income.”
A Terner Center study, cited in the letter, found that 80% of small property owners with fewer than 20 units saw a decline in rental income during COVID-19, with nearly 40% lacking confidence in their ability to make ends meet. Additionally, landlords are now dealing with skyrocketing insurance premiums, compounding financial pressures.
Overriding existing rent laws
If passed, AB 246 would override key landlord protections under:
- The Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which currently exempts single-family homes, condominiums, and newly constructed apartments from rent control.
- The California Tenant Protection Act, which sets a statewide cap on rent increases for most housing.
- Local rent control ordinances, such as those in Los Angeles and unincorporated L.A. County.
With the current emergency order extended through March 2025, the freeze could remain in place until at least March 2026.
A more balanced approach
CAA maintains that education and enforcement of existing price-gouging laws are the best ways to protect tenants without discouraging investment in rental housing.
“Protecting tenants and ensuring housing availability requires a balanced approach that considers the needs of all stakeholders, not just one side,” CAA’s letter states.
As an urgency measure, AB 246 requires approval by two-thirds of the Legislature to pass. If signed by the governor, it would take effect immediately.
CAA will continue to advocate against AB 246 and urges housing providers to voice their concerns ahead of next week’s hearing. Stay tuned for steps you can take.
Related content:
