Rent Control Jurisdic�ons with CIP Applica�ons Separate from Fair Return Processes Renter Popula�on per 2017 American Community Survey census data Page 1 of 2 Jurisdic�on Renter Popula�on Cost Threshold
Staff
Determina�on/
Hearing Officer
Tenant
Hardship
Op�on
Project Cost
Recovery
Pass Through Increase
Cap
Los Angeles 2,321,544 N/A Staff No 50% $55/month
San Francisco 477,798 N/A Hearing Officer Yes
1-5 Units = 100%
6+ Units = 50%
Seismic – 100%
$30/month or no more
than 5% of current rent
San Jose 418,053 N/A Hearing Officer No 100% 3% of current rent Oakland 238,645 N/A Hearing Officer No 70%
10% including
AGA + Banking, no more
than 30% increase in
5-year period
Santa Ana 180,991 N/A Hearing Officer No 100% 10% of current rent Hayward 73,110 N/A Hearing Officer No 50% 10% including
AGA + Banking
Mountain View 44,744 N/A Hearing Officer Yes
1-5 Units = 90%
6-20 Units = 75%
21+ Units = 50%
5% of current rent
Alameda
(currently) 38,581 8* the monthly
rent on all units Staff No 100% No Cap
Culver City 17,270 N/A Staff Yes 50% 3% of current rent
Rent Control Jurisdic�ons that Address Capital improvements Only via Fair Return Processes Renter Popula�on per 2017 American Community Survey census data Page 2 of 2 Jurisdic�on Renter Popula�on
Sacramento 245,752
Santa Ana 180,991
Santa Monica 60,544
Berkeley 57,909
Richmond 54,524
An�och 44,096
Gardena 38,581
West Hollywood 28,673
Palm Springs 28,062
East Palo Alto 20,811
Beverly Hills 18,803
Los Gatos 17,862
Exhibit 2 - Jurisdictional CIP Policy Chart
Alameda City Council
December 5, 2023
- Document
- Exhibit 2 - Jurisdictional CIP Policy Chart
- Meeting
- December 5, 2023
- Body
- Alameda City Council
- Original file
- 204 KB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on legistar1.granicus.com. That file is the official record.