Oh god, here we go again. Look people- if you cannot afford to live in mountain view it is not the city's fault, it is of landlords obligation to make sure YOU can afford the rent! Landlords are there to make money and have plenty of rules they already abide by. It is not fair I do agree, but just move to Sunnyvale! My rent sky rocketed from 1400- to 2600! I felt the pain and stress me and my wife both worked full time, we moved and now pay 1350!!! Just move its not the cities. Fault!!!!! MOVE

Will - I agree rent control is not the answer. For example, if we moved out of our condo, we could rent it for $3000/month. Rent control would only prevent that rent from rising too fast... but the bottom line is, the only people who can already afford $3000/month are well-off enough to afford the rent increases too. If you don't like the prices, move somewhere else.

I remember well the college student protest demonstrations of the ‘60s and ‘70s, when radical activist organizers shamelessly bussed in fellow activists and students from other universities to swell the size of their demonstrations fallaciously. Just as our present-day discredited SF, Berkeley, and Oakland Occupiers, they even used paid street people as shills.

Professional activists are pushing MV rent control. Knowing this, I wonder just how many of these so-called demonstrators actually are legitimate MV tenants, and not just MV non-tenants and other non-residents conjured up by rent control activists or labor unions (like the SEIU) to put false pressure on our City Council. Politics is a nasty business and in situations like this, we must be careful to separate the wheat from the chaff. I suspect that there was a lot of chaff and not much wheat at this and earlier demonstrations.

Well actually, housing prices including rents are not the product of a free market. The current prices stem from a government-created market in which "sellers" (currently) can make a killing in Mountain View. But look, this City Council is not going to adopt direct rent control even for lower-income tenants in older (pre-1995) apartments subject to municipal rent control under existing state law. Not all tenants in such housing are low-income, of course, and some very low-income tenants are on Section 8 Housing Assistance. In any event, a majority of this City Council will want to do something to discourage rent "gouging" in apartments or at least "look good." So, the December 1st meeting should at least be interesting.

Egad, this is an issue for everyone. First, may I point out that I am a 30-year resident at the SAME address, watching the rent go up on a regular basis; upsetting, perhaps, but manageable. For perspective, my current rent is ~$1800/mo. approximated because of the interesting development whereas utilities are billed separately @ ~$48 by Conservice (where did they come from?) in effect a rent increase- but it absolves the apartment management from blame.
By way of historical perspective, my rent for the same apartment in 1977 (pre-improvements) was...$265/mo. with utilities included- standard practice at the time. Makes you think, yes?
Most of the realty development locally has occurred within the last 5 years. Don't get me started on the monster development erupting just across ECR- is it so hard to "anticipate" what this will do to traffic/pollution/cost of living within the next few years??? This used to be a laid-back bedroom community with down-home values for the local residents, long gone by now. Get used to this state of the state we are in; not the one we were expecting, just what has "developed".

"housing prices including rents are not the product of a free market. The current prices stem from a government-created market"

Umm, OK. Do tell us about this.

If the poor move out of Mountain View due to rent increases, who will work in our restaurants, shops, retail stores, etc? We need those people living here to have a quality of life that we are used to. The local restaurant, Srasa, on Middlefield road near Whisman cannot open on weekends because the owner is unable to hire enough workers to staff it.

Horis (?) Greeley said in the 1800ds.. Go West Young Man, Go West.... and to those who can not afford to live in this area (not just MtnView)... get the hell out.... Go to Watsonville, go to Tennesee, go to anywhere... Google "cheap places to live." .. Don't friggen ruin MtnView or the South Bay...Just go....
If the locals (restraunts, lawn care, etc) have to pay more, such is the life in the barrel..

Next thing will be ,,,, the Commie Union (SEIU) will come in and try to desroy our city....

Bye George

You really don't know what you're talking about, right?

@USA

Well for starters, by making it illegal for housing production, rental or otherwise, to keep up with demand...

"by making it illegal for housing production"

Housing production is illegal?

The building where my business used to be was torn down last year to make room for condos. It was near La Bamba which was torn down for new "affordable housing". I guess they did not know that was illegal.

The government controls the increase in supply of new housing, so the housing market is a controlled market. If we simply let builders build as much as is profitable for them to build, prices will fall commensurate with the drop in quality of life from living in an overcrowded city. City Council seems to be doing as much as possible toward that end. Can anyone think of a proposal to build housing that received a no?

Where were rent control proponents when I was upside down on my rental property and could barely afford to keep up the payments? I almost had to file bankruptcy but instead sucked it up, cut back on expenses, didn't take vacations etc and waited it out (over 5 years mind you)

NO RENT CONTROL. If you can't afford the rents here move somewhere that you can. there are MUCH less expensive areas not that far from here with very manageable commutes for all those restaurant/retail/service workers.

"Housing production is illegal?"

Slow down and maybe finish reading the entire sentence before replying? I promise its not that long.

Can't wait until I can read the Voice without having to hear more about rent control. At first I was sympathetic and hoping for a solution that might help (not rent stabilization, but something to stop landlords from acting silly with the increases) but now I'm just tired of the whole debate.

I thought the city council just had a big meeting where some solutions (not stabilization) were discussed? Is that not good enough? Will they not stop until they are granted a permanent discount?

BTW - anyone who thinks all the new building is going to hold down rents/prices is just being silly. All the new units will just bring more people to live here (renting) and then one day they will want to buy a place of their own, but will have to compete with all the other recent arrivals who want to own too. All this new housing will not stabilize rents or prices.

Yes it is very easy to say: move, get out and use sarcasm (you must be proud of yourself -great advice). Not going to happen, we're fighting for our rights and I'm not moving yet. I've accumulated several jobs and work myself to the core, so I can continue living here, not for myself but for my girls'. And you all should come out and talk with us, get to know us, see what kind of people your neighbors.
We are not just coming up with a non issue, or made up unmeaningful circumstances. When one gets rental increases every six months or at one time 1,000.00 or gets told to move out in 2 weeks time so we can remodel the apartment and off course you're welcome to come back and pay 1,600.00 more. No this is a form of extreme greed with no consideration for humanity.

One of the problems with the "just move" idea is that many people who are having trouble with rent in MV also work in MV. If they "just move," they are likely to add to road congestion as they commute in for work.

There is no such thing as a "free market" anywhere on the planet. By definition, a market is organized, which means regulated. It is entirely possible to regulate a housing market such that rents are stabilized for many while landlords of all types earn substantial profits. Rent control can be part of that, though development has to be part of it as well. None of this is easy, but it can be done intelligently.

@MV

"I've accumulated several jobs and work myself to the core, so I can continue living here, not for myself but for my girls'."

Why? Honestly, I don't know your personal situation, but why would you do that to yourself and your family? Why not move some place more affordable and actually get to spend time with your family? If you are working multiple jobs you must not have much time to spend with your children. I can't see how living in Mountain View is more important than being able to see a reasonable amount of time.

I'm not trying to tell you what to do, just really trying to understand your logic. Honestly, I personally would prefer to move and enjoy a more relaxed life with my kids than staying here and never getting to see them, always being stressed and tired, etc.

Look around - not just in Mountain View but in the Bay Area (for starters). There is plenty of room to double the houses and apartments. Double. But so much real property is declared off limits by government agencies that when a city or group of cities adds jobs and the accompanying demand for existing housing, prices of houses and rentals will soar. So here we have had a city council of seven homeowners voting to double the market value of their own homes since 2008. By my reckoning, every member of the city council since 2008 has not only been a homeowner (although one was briefly a renter), but all but one has been screened and then endorsed by at least one landlord group. And by the way, that does not make them bad guys - just committed. No one ran for city council advocating any direct rent control. The city election last fall probably had the lowest voter turnout since Mountain View moved city elections to November of even-numbered years. But what ends up counting is who runs and who votes. If renters want a real seat at the table of homeowners,they need to seriously participate in campaigns, get persons to run and, as to adult citizen-renters, get them registered to vote and then to vote. Otherwise, renter-rights advocates could attempt to enact a law through the initiative process. Of course, landlords would put up millions of dollars to campaign against any such initiative.

I have lived in this area since 1965. My taxes luckily have been stabilized by Prop. 13. Luckily for us or we would have had to leave. But owners of rental property are also getting by with no property tax increase while they can boost the rents on their tenants. Is that so fair?

Other cities have a limited rate for rent increases. Oakland has a 3% annual limit on increases.

Think what a town would be like if only rich people lived there. Who is going to garden, house clean, deliver things etc? Who is going to teach the children, put out fires, police the streets etc????? These folks are not paid enough to live here. We need a balanced community in order for it to function.

Again, you're not hearing what the issue is. If you need to know more my girls are very confident have great grades, in sports, marching band, never been in any trouble - to uproot my girls from there home is not the answer. And from their best friends is not right. The right thing to do is ask Council to support us, instead of greed.

Hi everyone - just a comment from the other side of the world, from Europe.
Rent control might sound as a very harsh, almost communist, term to many Americans.
But let’s call it rent regulation, or rent stabilization, or whatever.
Here in western Europe almost all countries have rent regulation, in one way or another. It is only in Ireland and in England where rents are unregulated.
But in all other countries rents are linked to either Consumer Price Index, or inflation, or rents are compared and set with rents in the neighbourhood (Mietspegel in Germany). Believe it or not, but in Sweden rents are negotiated every year with the Swedish Union of Tenants! Yes, for the private and public sector.
Of course, tenants as well as homeowners must be able to plan for the future, and know where they will be in say two, three, five years. And homes are not regulated by ‘supply & demand’, not anywhere in the world. The market just doesn’t function here. That’s why there has to be some kind of regulations on rent increases.
All the best! Magnus Hammar, International Union of Tenants, www.iut.nu
commented

I have friends who went through some tough times to keep their apartment buildings when the economy was bad. They had to cut back on everything but the very basics for years. They are the ones who took the risks and responsibility, and I don't deny them profits now. That's just my opinion, of course. There are probably a few building owners who gouge tenants, and perhaps that can be addressed fairly - but not with rent control. That simply doesn't work.
I don't understand the posters here who say "who will mow our lawns, clean our houses, work in restaurants, etc?" It's not like Mountain View is an island of itself and all people working here, live here. That is simply not the truth - nor can anyone force this to happen. There are many areas, within decent commute, that are affordable. Nobody owes ANYONE a place to live, just because that person WANTS to live there! Yes, I understand that many families don't want to move, because they and/or their children like it here - but that is not reality. It's a simple fact of life that you live where you can afford - you do not demand the economy bow to YOUR desires.
I lived in San Francisco, but was eventually priced out of the housing market there. I didn't expect the City to assure I could stay. I moved to a place I could afford. That's how life works.

You live in a multi-million dollar home and have the gall to think your opinion is worth anything??

Sorry, but most people do not have your luck. In the meantime, the true citizens of MV will do what we can to preserve our diverse community.

"But owners of rental property are also getting by with no property tax increase while they can boost the rents on their tenants."

What?? I own a rental property in Mountain View and my property taxes have increased. While we're at it, I haven't raised the rent since I've owned the property (nearly 20 years). So much for the above statement.

The general opinion on housing fills these comment sections is that we need to stop development and that the rent is too high. Well, I hate to mention it yet again, but lack of development is what is making the rent too high. There are simply too many people chasing too little housing, and it's the ones with more money who bid up the prices and drive others out. I've rented in Mountain View since the 90's, and seen it slowly become a tech worker enclave as other people are priced out. Rentals cycle quickly, as the rising rents price people out, while houses get bought be tech people as existing residents with low prop-13 taxes move away or die.

Rent control is horrible. It helps current residents stay, but it also makes neighborhoods stagnate and then start to get run down. When landlords are squeezed, they have no money for improvements and do the bare minimum number of repairs, so buildings stop being clean and pretty and just become livable. At first, rent control seems like no big deal, landlords are taking big profits, let's help the poor renters, but what you do is you remove the upside in rents, while doing nothing to address the cost of owning and maintaining the property, which increases over time due to tax hikes, proposition, inflation, and just plain age. There comes a time when it's no longer cost effective to make any improvements, so they don't happen, and you get an adversarial relationship between landlords and tenants, with both bible thumping the rule book instead of normal human interaction.

If you want lower rents, petition the city council for more housing and loosening of building restrictions which make cost effective housing expensive to build.

Please stop degrading people like: retail sales associates, gardeners, cops, firefighters, waiters, house cleaners, delivery drivers, etc. by calling them "poor" and referring to them as "people we need to keep around so they can serve us."

I hope rents continue to rise so you folks have to clean your own quarters, put out your own fires, stop your own burglars, launder your own clothes, cut your own lawn, and go buy food for yourselves. All of you are high-nose ingrates and don't need hard working "poor people" around to serve your needs.

What developer is going to develop moderate priced rental housing? They've been getting free money thanks to Fed Policy. They speculate by tearing down the apartments which rent for the least and building something that will set new records for monthly rent. Full steam ahead. Make hay while the money is free.

More development won't help solve this problem. The slower and more lumbering the approval process the more this will help the shock to the system of this pathological process....

The only greed here is renters who want the city to guarantee them below market rents. What you should be doing is petitioning your officials to allow new buildings to go up, 10's of thousands of them.

Landlords have every right to earn a market return on their investments. It the existing homeowners in your community who have the NIMBY attitudes about new development.

Your are not fighting for your rights, you are fighting for your landlord's money which you have NO right to. If you feel strongly create a tax payer initiative paid by all Mountain View residents and get money for housing subsidies, don't take make the property owners shoulder the burden of making up for your money short falls.

You can't compare socialist European countries to the bay area. Essentially the people here wanting rent control want to live at the expense of the property owner. Sometimes the property owner is subsidizing the renter to the point where they have a negative balance at the end of the month. In many European countries, all pay taxes to pay for the poor. There is absolutely no comparison. Also, in places like Germany, there is no chance for the majority to even own a place because there simply isn't enough housing for sale, so most people rent, it is a system that is for renters. The US encourages homeownership, not renting.

If I buy a house in Mountain View, my mortgage will be 5k at least. How much can I charge if I want to rent it out?

If I buy a building, I have to be able to cover costs for landscaping, maintenance, and repairs, plus mortgage, plus insurance. I take the risk that the market could fall and that I could lose my equity and investment. The renter risks nothing, but wants the reward, + any profit??? No WAY. Move and commute!

I was raised in gangland because my parents couldn't afford more. Get over yourselves.

No one paid my parent's bills when they were working two jobs. We didn't live in luxurious MT View but we lived in the East Bay with mediocre schools. My parents didn't whine for their kids (who weren't entitled) to be served up fancy Mountain View schools.

WE don't owe you or your children anything. How in the heck do you know your landlord's financial situation? You are fighting for your own greedy ends. That's not how it works in this country. We don't want to pay for you. Figure out how to pay for yourself.

Sigh. As a person growing up during the turbulent 1960s and 1970s, I had hope that the BART system would get to use the ROW that the SP was using; BART WAS to be the new transit system that grew the SFBA properly.
Then the RICH PEOPLE in Atherton and Menlo Park stopped BART from completing a loop like many cities have done with the Interstate and Defense Highway system. Yes, tanks and Divisions of our Armed Forces are supposed to be able to use these highways for National Defense. I personally doubt anyone will be able to use CA 17 ( now 880 ) for hauling 50ton tanks around, but I digress...

Now those same RICH PEOPLE are saying " MOVE, BUT NOT TOO FAR AWAY SO THAT YOU CAN KEEP SERVING ME ".

I think we have seen this problem before; " I got mine, so getting yours is your problem ". That was the reason WARS started...over LAND and the occupants turned into slaves.

There is no land left in the SFBA unless you want to plow all your garbage into the Bay and build on it like how Foster City was created.
No more land is being made; a Guaranteed Profit is made possible by simply owning the land; That is the blunt truth of a free market system.
That same truth can and does turn many landowners into SLUMLORDS. Note the part of the word: LORDS.
Yes, you are housing the PEASANTS, therefore you get to dictate the terms like the lords of old.
Items out of US History: The Appalachian COAL MINER:
(Merle Travis)

Some people say a man is made outta mud
A poor man's made outta muscle and blood
Muscle and blood and skin and bones
A mind that's a-weak and a back that's strong

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

I was born one mornin' when the sun didn't shine
I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine
I loaded sixteen tons of number nine coal
And the straw boss said "Well, a-bless my soul"

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

I was born one mornin', it was drizzlin' rain
Fightin' and trouble are my middle name
I was raised in the canebrake by an ol' mama lion
Cain't no-a high-toned woman make me walk the line

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

If you see me comin', better step aside
A lotta men didn't, a lotta men died
One fist of iron, the other of steel
If the right one don't a-get you
Then the left one will

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

- Tennessee Ernie Ford

And seen in the " Grapes of Wrath "

The farms were foreclosed on BY THE DEED OWNERS OF THE LAND!

We have been here before. The rest of the movie is just as unpleasant as the " row houses " built by the landowners in California.

The Santa Clara Valley was a similar situation; Then SAND turned into GOLD.

When I was young, I lived in a house that had a cherry orchard next to it.
Our valley kept a Del Monte packing plant busy. Both are gone today.

" Those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it "
-Santayana

@MV,

Since when did the Crossings have apartments for rent? Are you renting a house or a town house at the Crossings? Do you want rent control over single home rentals? You must be one of those who rents at the Crossings so your children can attend Los Altos schools which is where Crossings children go. Homeowners at the Crossings pay more for their homes because of this. And you want them to subsidize you for figuring this out? I think you are not the typical MV renter.

It's funny that these protesters don't realize that the real cause of their problem is too little housing construction. If there were more apartments, they wouldn't cost as much.