The Brief

In the city of Los Angeles, some 650,000 apartments are subject to local rent control. How much rents can go up each year has been the subject of ongoing controversy between tenants and landlords, who often disagree about what’s fair amid a regional crisis in affordable housing.

The L.A. City Council, which sets policy, has been at the center of that tension. Last October, Councilmembers Bob Blumenfield and Hugo Soto-Martinez put forward a motion calling for a fresh look at the city’s decades-old formula for setting annual limits on rent hikes. The council approved that motion and called for a study to “conclude within 3 months.”

This May, the Economic Roundtable, the nonprofit research organization the city commissioned to carry out the study, submitted its report to the L.A. Housing Department. Four months later, the city still has not released it publicly. LAist obtained the report through a public records request.

The independent analysis found some of the city’s rules governing rent increases have favored landlords over tenants. The report recommends changes that could lower the rent hikes tenants face each year, setting up what is sure to be a fierce debate at city hall.

LAist has published the full report here (and you can also read it below).

What’s in the report? 

Over the course of 193 pages, the report offers an extensive analysis of the L.A. rental housing market, challenges facing both tenants and landlords, and the impact of the city’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance. Among the findings:

• About 35% of the rent L.A. tenants pay goes to operating expenses for apartment buildings, on average. This includes maintenance, utilities, insurance, payroll and other routine costs. Landlords can use the remainder to cover mortgages and turn a profit.
• From January 2020 through January 2023, 4 in 10 rent-controlled L.A. apartments became vacant. When a tenant leaves a rent-controlled unit, the city’s rules allow landlords to raise rents to market rates. These higher rents helped landlords absorb the impact of a nearly four-year freeze on rent hikes.
• Many expenses have risen sharply for landlords in recent years, outpacing inflation. Property insurance costs have roughly doubled since 2020. However, the report notes these expenses make up a relatively small portion of overall costs.
• About one-fifth of L.A. renters are living below the federal poverty line. According to U.S. Census data, just over half of those renters spend 90% of their income or more on rent. Rent increases can leave these low-income renters vulnerable to displacement and homelessness.
• The city’s current range of allowable annual rent increases — anywhere from 3% to 8% depending on inflation — is higher than the increases permitted in most other California cities with rent control.

The report makes some recommendations on how the city could change its formula for determining annual rent increase limits:

• Either eliminate a provision allowing landlords to raise rents an extra 1% per year if they pay for a tenant’s gas, plus another 1% if they pay for electricity — or replace it. The report estimates each 1% increase could raise rents an additional $150 to $240 per month after 10 years, more than the actual cost of providing those utilities. One option, the report says, would be to instead use a surcharge that better captures the increased costs of providing those utilities.

The report recommends considering changing which version of the consumer price index is used to calculate allowable increased to one that excludes housing costs, shown as "Less Shelter" in the chart above.

(

Courtesy Equitable Rent report

)

• Change how annual rent increases are calculated. Instead of using a version of the consumer price index driven to a large degree by housing cost inflation, the report recommends a different index that excludes housing costs. The report argues this would stop the feedback loop of allowing high housing inflation to create further housing inflation.

What do landlord advocates say?

LAist shared the report with advocates for landlords and tenants.

Landlord advocates strongly disputed the report’s conclusions. Daniel Yukelson with the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles pointed to recent data from the National Apartment Association, a trade group for property owners, concluding that California landlords earn 7 cents of profit on average for every dollar of rent.

“What [the report] is trying to do is make a PR effort to lay the groundwork to chip away at what little ability landlords have in L.A. to be able to raise rents and be able to keep up with their costs,” Yukelson said.

He said the report takes a macroeconomic view of the city’s rental market, but fails to capture the unique struggles facing many small landlords.

“There are plenty of owners out there who have had their renters in place for many years,” Yukelson said. “They're way below market. And they're having trouble today keeping up with the growing costs of insurance, maintenance and supplies.”

What do tenant advocates say?

Tenant advocates took a very different view of the report. They said it correctly identifies problems with L.A. rent control and validates their demands for stronger limits.

“Small landlords are able to maintain their profits and draw income above their expenses — they haven't been overly burdened by rent stabilization,” said Christina Boyar, a legal fellow with Public Counsel and a member of the Keep L.A. Housed coalition.

Tenant advocates have called for a 3% ceiling on annual rent hikes and elimination of the 2% surcharge for landlords who provide gas and electricity. They point to other L.A.-area cities that currently limit rent increases to less than 3% with no add-ons for utilities.

“The report shows that rent costs exceeding what tenants can pay is a primary cause of homelessness,” Boyar said. “We are obviously in a homelessness crisis in L.A., and if this formula isn't updated soon, more folks will just fall into homelessness.”

How LAist obtained the report

The city’s housing officials have been in possession of the Economic Roundtable report since May.

When LAist first requested the report, officials told a reporter the study was not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act, saying there was an exemption for “deliberative process.”

They provided the report shortly after LAist’s public records lawyer intervened.

Why had the city not released the report? 

Daniel Flaming, president of the Economic Roundtable and a co-author of the report, said he didn’t have a good answer for why the report was kept under wraps.

“I think when it's a politically contentious issue, there are attempts to manage the conversation,” Flaming said. “The substance of the report is final. It was submitted as a final report and accepted by the city as a final work product.”

Sharon Sandow, a spokesperson for the L.A. Housing Department, told LAist last week the document was still a “draft report,” and they didn't have a specific date lined up for its release.

“There are several rounds of revisions left to go before this report is considered final,” Sandow said in an email. “Economic Roundtable is under contract to complete this report through January 2025 — though clearly we hope to have it finalized before then.”

By the end of last week, Sandow sent LAist a version of the report she described as "final."

Under state public records law, preliminary drafts must be released if they are retained in the ordinary course of business, as this one has been. LAist noted in its correspondence with housing department officials that the report was not a draft but was a finished product submitted by the contractor.

Why it matters

The city’s rent increase limits apply to a huge number of L.A. residents. Almost two-thirds of L.A. households rent their homes. Local rent control rules cover about 650,000 apartments — 44% of the city’s entire housing stock. Apartments in L.A. are generally covered by local rent control if they were built before Oct. 1, 1978.

Housing costs are a major burden for many L.A. households. About 59% of the city’s renters spend more than 30% of their income on rent, a level considered unaffordable by federal government standards.

The report notes that because L.A. has a 3% floor on annual increases — even in years when the consumer price index is lower — landlords have often been allowed to raise rents above inflation. Between 2010 and 2020, the consumer price index in L.A. rose 21%. During the same period, rents in rent-controlled L.A. apartments were allowed to rise 36%.

The issues facing landlords

On the other hand, the report finds that landlords have faced unique challenges — particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

State and local regulations allowed tenants who lost income during the pandemic to delay rent payments. Annual increases in rent-controlled housing were banned. And landlords were restricted from evicting tenants who fell behind on rent. That all played out during a time when the cost of maintenance, utilities and insurance was rising faster than inflation.

L.A. kept COVID-19 protections in place far longer than many other jurisdictions. The city faced strong criticism from landlords who argued too little was being done to help property owners.

Some of these hardships were addressed by government rent relief programs, which provided funds to landlords with tenants behind on rent. The report also notes that high turnover helped landlords raise rents to market rates and keep rental income nearly at pace with inflation.

But landlord advocates say some property owners have yet to fully recover from the pandemic. They now worry about the potential cost of proposals to remove gas stoves and install air conditioners.

“The cost of electricity is just going to continue going up,” Yukelson with the Apartment Association said. If the city stops landlords who provide electricity from raising rents an additional 1% per year, he said, “The next tenant is going to have to pay that burden, because the rents are going to have to go up.”

How L.A. stacks up to other cities

On balance, Flaming said the report shows that L.A.’s policies diverge significantly from how other California cities handle rent control. He said the utility surcharge in particular seems “arbitrary.”

“The Los Angeles ceiling and floor are atypically high for rent-controlled cities,” he said. “Among cities that have elected to control rents — and not all cities have — Los Angeles appears to be tilted toward landlords.”

Some L.A. city council members have floated the idea of establishing different rent control rules for “mom and pop” landlords and larger, corporate landlords. The report recommends the city instead target aid to small landlords, rather than allowing additional rent increases on tenants.

What happens now? 

The clock is ticking for the city to develop a new rent-control formula in time for Jan. 1, 2025. That’s when landlords will be required to give tenants notice of any rent increases starting in February. Many tenants in rent-controlled housing received a 4 to 6% annual rent increase on Feb. 1, 2024 due to the lapse of the L.A.’s COVID-19 rent freeze.

Soto-Martinez, one of the council members who requested the report be commissioned — has already called for capping increases at 3%.

In an email reacting to the Economic Roundtable report, Soto-Martínez told LAist, “As we await the finalized version of this report, it’s heartening to see so much data supporting the policy changes that renters have been demanding — especially when it comes to preventing excessive rent increases that can devastate working families.”

The city’s rent control debate is playing out against the larger backdrop of an election season where rent control — and many other housing-related measures — are up for a state-wide vote.

Read the full report

Link: Equitable Rent Rent Stabilization Standards in the City of Los Angeles

Note: The initial report released to LAist early last week was dated May 2024. Late last week, L.A. housing officials resent the report, now dated September 2024.

L.A. County leaders on Tuesday greenlit public transparency about payouts to county executives in response to LAist revealing a secretive $2 million settlement with the county’s CEO.

County supervisors unanimously approved a proposal by Supervisor Lindsey Horvath to have the county proactively inform the public about such settlements once they’re finalized and to look into creating a public website to describe them.

Among other things, the approved motion requires that all future settlements with county executives include language making it clear the agreement will be proactively disclosed to the public.

The backstory

The directive cited coverage by LAist revealing that two months ago, county CEO Fesia Davenport had quietly gotten a $2 million settlement payment from the county. As reported by LAist, Davenport’s settlement deal was labeled “confidential” and was not publicly reported out by the county.

The settlement was in response to her claims the supervisors harmed her reputation and caused her distress by putting a measure before voters — which was approved — that will create an elected county executive position. It’s among multiple reforms to restructure county government under last year’s voter-approved proposition, known as Measure G.

Davenport did not return a message for comment.

‘Public trust’ cited

“Transparency is central to strengthening public trust, without exception,” Horvath said in a statement after Tuesday’s vote. “Since joining the board, I have actively taken steps to ensure the public is included in the work of the county, especially concerning the use of public funds.

“Creating a clear process for department executive settlements is a commonsense action fundamental to good governance.”

David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, commented on the decision, calling transparency the "oxygen of accountability in government."

“There is no reason why the county should not be proactive about posting and disclosing settlements that have been reached, especially with former executives or staff,” Loy said.

Davenport was one of several county executives to receive sizable settlement payouts over the past few years. Four additional county executives received payouts, according to Davenport’s claims that led to her settlement.

Costco now is one of the largest companies to sue the Trump administration over tariffs, hoping to secure a refund if the Supreme Court declares the new import duties illegal.

The Supreme Court is weighing the future of President Donald Trump's tariffs on nearly all imports. Justices seemed skeptical about their legality during last month's oral arguments. Lower courts previously had found Trump improperly used emergency economic powers to set most of the new levies.

Dozens of companies across industries have filed lawsuits to seek refunds in the event the Supreme Court finds Trump's tariffs illegal. The list includes makeup giant Revlon, the canned foods maker Bumble Bee and Kawasaki, which makes motorcycles and more. Now Costco has joined the queue.

"This is the first time we're seeing big companies take their heads out of the sand publicly," said Marc Busch, a trade law expert at Georgetown University. For the most part, small companies have been leading the legal action against tariffs, he said, adding, "It's nice to finally see some heavyweights joining in the fray."

In its suit filed with the U.S. Court of International Trade, Costco did not specify how much it's already paid in tariffs, but the retail giant worries that even if the Supreme Court eventually unravels Trump's tariff regime, it may not be able to recoup all that money.

Costco executives in May had said that about a third of what is sold in the U.S. comes from abroad, predominantly non-food items.

NPR's Scott Horsley contributed to this report.
Copyright 2025 NPR

The L.A. City Council voted 8-4 on Tuesday to continue allowing the Los Angeles Police Department to be armed with 40 mm foam bullet launchers and tear gas.

California law enforcement agencies are required to track and publicly document how they use military equipment, including less-lethal bean bag shotgun rounds, drones and armored vehicles, under state law AB 481 passed in 2022. The law also requires city leaders to approve or disapprove military equipment use annually. That vote came in front of the council Tuesday.

Another law passed after the George Floyd protests of 2020 restricted the use of crowd-control weapons, including tear gas and foam bullets, unless specific criteria are met. In 2020, a federal judge also imposed an injunction restricting LAPD’s use of force at protests, citing the “unfortunate history of civil rights violations by LAPD officers.”

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez — who introduced an amendment asking city leaders to ban the LAPD’s use of 40 mm foam bullet launchers and tear gas — said military equipment use is allowed only in specific instances but that the police department has deployed the weapons “in ways that should make everyone here on this body pause.” He cited examples of weapons used against journalists and protesters during this summer’s protests against federal immigration activity in L.A.

“In recent months, we’ve watched this equipment deployed in ways that echo the same intimidation tactics we condemn in ICE raids — tactics that erode trust and violate basic legal protections,” he said. “Our residents should be able to exercise their rights without being met with [foam] bullets or tear gas.”

LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell countered that such weapons are "a de-escalation tool, short of using deadly force. The last thing we want to use is deadly force."

He continued: "Taking a tool like this away from us puts us in a very bad position relative to city liability and relative to protecting our officers and the public that we serve.”

In 2024, Los Angeles was liable for more than $50 million in payouts related to civil rights violations and unlawful use of force by the LAPD, according to the city controller’s office.

 ”Rather than be swayed by emotion or swayed by the loud voices of a relative few," McDonnell said Tuesday, "we're here to protect 4 million residents of Los Angeles and all the visitors who come here."

How we got here

After this summer’s anti-ICE protests, the LAPD once again came under scrutiny for its use of foam bullet launchers and tear gas.

An LAist investigation found LAPD used crowd-dispersal tools on people who did not appear to pose a threat and, in some cases, did not appear to be protesting at all. LAist reporters witnessed LAPD officers firing less-lethal munitions into crowds and at protestors running away from police. They did not hear clear warnings about the use of crowd-dispersal weapons during some of the protests and could not locate evidence that adequate warning was provided during subsequent protests.

But at Tuesday’s council meeting, McDonnell said, these weapons are deployed as “a last resort to be able to restore order” and after people have been given time to leave.

The Los Angeles Press Club sued the LAPD after June’s protests, citing violations of journalists’ rights while covering protests. After a judge issued an injunction in that case prohibiting the use of force against journalists, the LAPD filed an emergency motion asking the judge to lift the injunction, stating it required “operationally impracticable standards.” The judge denied the LAPD’s request.

How to watchdog your police department

One of the best things you can do to hold officials accountable is pay attention.

AB 481 requires police departments — including those at transit agencies, school districts and university campuses, sheriff’s departments, district attorney’s offices and probation departments — to provide reports about the use of military equipment.

So how do you know if they're in compliance? It’s simple. Search for the law enforcement agency name and "AB 481" on any search engine, and a public page should pop up. Here’s the LAPD’s.

The city of Los Angeles has been working on major changes to its charter, which is basically the city’s constitution. The changes could bring sweeping reform to how the city works.

The Los Angeles City Charter Reform Commission has been meeting for several months on a wide range of topics, including City Council expansion, ranked-choice voting systems and land-use planning changes.

“It is weedy. It is academic. But the charter touches Angelenos’ everyday lives,” said Raymond Meza, who chairs the commission.

This week, the commission will host a town hall meeting in Echo Park in an effort to get more people involved in the process. It will take place outside on the northeast lawn of the park — weather permitting.

Despite getting a slow start, the commission is hosting multiple meetings in an effort to meet an April 2 deadline to submit proposals to the City Council. It’ll be up to the council to decide whether to place reform proposals on the ballot next November.

The commission has broken reform down into four subject areas, with committees for each.

They are:

• planning and infrastructure
• government structure
• better government
• personnel and budget

“We’re in an exciting moment,” said David Levitus of L.A. Forward, an advocacy group.

“Looking at the charter for reform is long overdue”

Reform Commission

The L.A. City Council created the commission last year after a series of scandals rocked City Hall. Former Councilmember Jose Huizar went to prison on federal corruption charges and secret audio tapes revealed backroom dealing on redistricting.

The panel is made up of four appointees by Mayor Karen Bass, two by the council president and two by the president pro tempore. Those eight selected an additional five through an open application process.

On Thursday, the full commission is expected to take up proposals for a two-year budget cycle and an expedited city hiring process. Advocates of the changes say extending budget planning from one to two years will allow city leaders to better anticipate spending and revenue.

They say the city hiring process is slow and byzantine.

Meza said the Echo Park meeting Saturday is an opportunity for members of the public to learn more about the process and speak at length with commissioners.

“We absolutely want to hear from people what is important to them as residents of the city of Los Angeles when it comes to their expectations of their city government," he said.

How to get involved

For a list of all upcoming meetings, go here.

To submit a public comment, you can email reformLAcharter@lacity.org.

There’s also a survey on the commission’s website at reformlacharter.lacity.gov.