State Legislation Threatens Rent Control : Housing: Bill would allow some rents to rise to market levels in Santa Monica, West Hollywood and three other cities. The Senate is expected to pass it.

The term “vacancy decontrol” certainly sounds bureaucratic, but to Stephen Alpert of Santa Monica it sounds like trouble.

Alpert says the only reason he has been able to afford to live in that city is that he has a rent-controlled apartment. Under a vacancy-decontrol bill being considered in Sacramento, however, rents on such units would be allowed to increase to market levels under certain circumstances.

“Vacancy decontrol means [many] people who live in Santa Monica won’t be able to live in Santa Monica anymore,” Alpert said.

Causing the concern is a bill that would affect Santa Monica, West Hollywood and the three other California cities with strict rent-control laws--Berkeley, East Palo Alto and Cotati, a small enclave near Sonoma.

The bill, sponsored by state Sen. Jim Costa (D-Fresno), would permit rents to rise to market level when an apartment is voluntarily vacated--the very thing strict rent-control laws now prohibit. Units could then be placed under rent control again until the next vacancy occurs.

The measure would prohibit rent control on single-family homes--a provision that has become a contentious issue in San Francisco, where more than 20,000 rental houses would become exempt from rent restrictions as they are voluntarily vacated.

If approved, the legislation would mark a historic turning point in a nearly two-decade-long, statewide struggle between landlords and tenants. Municipalities have successfully retained authority over rent regulations, but if the Costa bill is approved, the state would begin to play a major role.

The legislation is expected to win approval in the Senate early this week. It will then move to the Assembly, where similar measures have passed half a dozen times over the past decade, only to founder in the Senate.

“It’s going to be very hard to defeat the Costa bill,” said Santa Monica Mayor Paul Rosenstein. “People have to be prepared for the possibility we will be living under a new form of rent control.”

A three-year phase-in period is included in the bill to discourage wild rent fluctuations. During the phase-in years, rents could rise no more than 25% per new tenant or 50% overall.

While rent-control supporters argue that such increases would threaten economic and ethnic diversity in their communities, landlord groups say rent-control units are already in the hands of people with relatively high incomes.

“If you look at the census data and the Mercedes in the subterranean garages, [Santa Monica is] already Yuppieville,” said Robert Sullivan, spokesman for the Greater Los Angeles Apartment Owners Assn.

Under the Costa bill more and more units would be rented at market-level rates, rather than hundreds of dollars below it, as often happens now.

Landlords say they need higher rents to pay for refurbishing long-neglected units and to encourage new construction. Opponents view the legislation as an intrusion by the state into a local matter--and as a crippling blow to affordable housing.

“It’s the slow death of affordable housing,” said Tony Trendacosta, lead attorney for the Santa Monica Rent Board. “This would have a devastating effect.”

Critics also warn about harassment. “If it passes, the real fear is that many tenants will be harassed into leaving their apartments,” Rosenstein said.

Rent-control advocates have staved off similar bills over the years with the help of now-retired state Sen. David Roberti, who blocked the measures in the Judiciary Committee.

But those days are over. The Judiciary Committee passed the Costa bill in April, thanks in part to a stunning turnabout by longtime lawmaker state Sen. Nicholas Petris (D-Oakland). Though he represents Berkeley, a city with strict rent control, Petris for the first time voted to move the vacancy-decontrol measure to the Senate floor for a vote.

Because of term limits, this is Petris’ last term in the Legislature. He has said he backed the measure because of the takeover of the Berkeley Rent Board by a group determined to take a radical, pro-tenant course that he deemed unfair and unwise.

*

Virtually conceding the Senate vote, rent-control advocates are girding for a stand in the Assembly. They say their strategy is to kill the measure in committee, using the gridlock of the current Assembly session to their advantage.

Many bills are dying in committee because membership is equally divided between Democrats and Republicans--and members are voting along party lines.

Assemblywoman Sheila J. Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) said she hopes that leaving the rent-control issue to cities may prove appealing to the Assembly’s large number of new members.

“People are really interested in local control,” Kuehl said. “I think it’s a very important thing for the few cities we have in the state that want it to be able to choose a strong rent-control system.”

But a longtime rent-control foe, Santa Monica landlord John Rodriguez, believes that this is finally the year to put a dent in what he terms the Draconian rent-control system.

“There’s no indication [the legislation is] not going to pass this time,” he said. “It’s a welcome relief.”

Steve Carlson, a lobbyist for apartment owners, is more cautious. “They’re formidable opponents and not to be underestimated at all,” he said of rent-control advocates.

Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco) could be the wild card in the rent-control battle.

In the past, he has not used the power of his office to affect the issue. But Brown, prevented by term limits from seeking reelection in 1996, is expected to run for mayor of San Francisco--where the prospect of an end to rent control for single-family homes has stirred debate.

“I think the Speaker is more interested in the issue now that he’s settling into San Francisco politics,” said Christine Minnehan, a pro-rent-control lobbyist from the Western Center on Law and Poverty.