16 voices for and against capping residential rents at 3 percent in St. Paul

Oct. 23—On Nov. 2, St. Paul voters will determine whether the city will impose a 3 percent annual limit on residential rent increases, possibly the strictest rent-control ordinance in the country.

Supporters say too many low- to moderate-income tenants have seen their monthly rents spike overnight in a hot housing market, and the proposal — which would be imposed on all rental units, including new construction — will give vulnerable residents needed housing stability. Critics predict a negative impact on housing turnover and private-sector investment that could lead to less availability of affordable units, as well as less investment in maintenance and upkeep.

Here's a look at 16 opinions on both sides of the issue:

VOTING 'YES'

Katheryn Schneider, a landlord: "When you buy a home, you get a mortgage so you know what your costs will be for the next 30 years. Why shouldn't renters have the same economic stability as homeowners? ... Stable housing is not only the right thing to do for renters. It's the right thing to do for everyone in St. Paul."

Alan Richardson Hohn, a landlord: "If my budget's wrong, and my expenses ever outweigh the income, I can apply for an exemption. Community deserves protection from predatory landlords who put profit over strength and growth."

St. Paul City Council member Nelsie Yang, a renter: "Engaging renters on the campaign trail, I see the need for it. ... (The critics are) not here talking to the people who are being displaced from their own home. I just got off the phone talking to renters who are no longer living in their apartment because their landlord increased their rent by $400 a month, instantly. When you talk to landlords who are doing what is right, who are making housing sustainable, they don't have an issue with this at all. Housing is a human right."

State Sen. Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul: "We all need, want and deserve a safe place to live. A place to call home. But that remains elusive, and too expensive for too many, a destabilizing force in the lives of Minnesotans. We need more investment, but as we fight for it, rent stabilization will create predicable, manageable housing costs for people who rent in St. Paul."

Bahieh Hartshorn, a renter and board chair of the West Side Community Organization: "This policy is so personal to a lot of people. ... It can feel like a gut punch, like an ugly shock, that letter you get in the mail saying your rent is going to go up. Knowing they can never increase your rent more than 3 percent helps people make long-term decisions about where they want to live, and for how long. That's the type of freedom people get to experience as homeowners who have that expectation their payments won't go up. It's not the type of freedom low-income renters get to have."

Tram Hoang, campaign manager of the Keep St. Paul Home ballot initiative, and policy advocate with the Alliance for Metropolitan Stability: "For the past 20 years, median rent has not increased more than 3 percent (annually). That tells us 3 percent is enough. It's generous. People have been able to keep up with property taxes and maintenance, even amidst economic turbulence like the (2008) foreclosure crisis. ... This issue most disparately impacts low-wealth renters and renters of color. When we look at St. Paul, we know people of color are most likely to be renting. It impacts the majority of the city, because the majority of the city are renters."

St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter: "One of the challenges of policymaking by referendum is we sort of lock in a first draft. I do believe there are concerns with regard to potential new housing starts, at a time when our population is growing so fast. ... I am voting 'Yes' for rent stabilization. Not because the policy is flawless as drafted — we can and must make it better, quickly — but because it's a start."

Edward Goetz, director of Center for Urban and Regional Affairs at the University of Minnesota: "It's not the strictest in the world. It's not the strictest in the country. Berkeley, Calif., sets their (rent control) to 65 percent of the Consumer Price Index."

VOTING 'NO'

Bill Lindeke, a former member of the St. Paul Planning Commission, and author of multiple books on St. Paul: "I think it would make the housing shortage worse in St. Paul because it would stop new construction of housing in the city. That pretty much guarantees rental increases for a lot of people. Landlords will raise rents by 3 percent annually, and that's higher than the annual average for the past 20 years. At the same time, it would be hard to find new apartments, as a result of not building new units. A lot of the city's climate action plan revolves around building new housing by transit."

Jim McCorkell, a St. Paul landlord: "My wife and I are small landlords. We own five duplexes in Mac-Groveland and Highland, including the one we live in. We support the goal of having more affordable housing ... but we oppose this referendum. If it passes, we would definitely increase rents the maximum 3 percent every year from now on. There would be no other responsible choice. We don't currently do that with long-term tenants because we want to retain them. ... If passed, this policy will result in many people paying higher rent immediately, lots of deferred maintenance, many landlords selling out to large corporate landlords, and virtually no new rental housing construction."

St. Paul City Council member Jane Prince: "The ordinance before us is far too blunt of an instrument. ... We just can't afford to discourage new construction. ... (Unlike this ballot initiative), some cities exempt new construction (from rent control) for 15 years, and then you roll off of it. ... You may see some decline in property upkeep, which is something we absolutely can't afford in St. Paul."

Robbie Grossman, a board member with the St. Paul Area Association of Realtors: "It's going to decrease the current supply of housing if landlords decide to turn their current rentals into owner-occupied properties, if the landlord decides to sell. ... This is a sweeping ordinance across the full spectrum of all landlords across the city. The landlord you're talking about could be your neighbor across the street who owns one or two units, and may be using that income to supplement their kid's college. Those people are going to be really hindered if they can't raise the rent to keep up."

Ashley Holmes, a St. Paul landlord: "I'm a woman-of-color apartment owner and I'll be voting 'No.' ... This proposal is going to hurt most of the people of color, the majority (of whom) live in the neighborhoods north of (Interstate) 94 and east of the Capitol. These neighborhoods are already struggling and this cap would be disastrous for the people who own and rent in those neighborhoods. This rent cap would be taking away money from the housing system, which is the opposite of what needs to happen to create stable livable rents in those areas. Do we make our schools better by taking away cash and investment? Absolutely not."

Jason George, business manager with the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49, which operates construction equipment: "These kinds of policies, while maybe well-intentioned, are not the solution. ... You're going to have a race to the bottom on construction and renovations. Property owners are going to look to renovate things the cheapest they can. ... Here we are stopping job growth in the cities where we're trying to recruit people to work. ... It's going to have a chilling effect on future development, and that's bad for jobs in the city. Future developments are sources of city revenue. That's how they pay for plowing the roads and fixing the streets, which are also things our trades do."

Sue Nichols, a landlord of multiple affordable units: "It doesn't give people any room to try and improve their properties. My property taxes could easily go up 5 percent (in a year). I've had problems with renters, and I've gone to make phone calls to people from the attorney general to my local neighborhood community organization looking for what resources there are for me, as a landlord, to deal with problem tenants. And there's just nothing. Sometimes it seems to me that the government sees landlords as the problem. Some sort of cooperation between government, landlords and nonprofits is going to be a far better solution."

St. Paul-based developer Jamie Stolpestad: "Rent control stifles investment, so you don't get as much housing. It's basic supply and demand. We need more supply. The population of St. Paul is the highest it's ever been, and we need more places to put people. I would argue it's addressing a symptom. The root cause is we don't have enough housing."