Activists and tenants in England have called for a nationwide, pro-rent control demonstration, taking place next month on April 18. More than 40 organizations, including the London Renters Union and Greater Manchester Tenants Union, are organizing the action. Like many other countries in Europe, tenants in England have been dealing with outrageous rent hikes and the prospect of homelessness.
“Sky-high housing costs mean we work two jobs, and cut back on essentials to get by,” the demonstration’s organizers wrote in a statement. “We fear being pushed out by a rent rise, too scared to complain about conditions that make our kids sick. All the while, developers hollow out our communities, demolishing homes and building luxury flats we can never afford.”
The event will call on politicians to put people first, not the profit-driven agenda of the real estate industry.
“Another housing system is possible,” organizers added. “When we had rent controls, tenants spent much less of our income on rent. When we built council housing at scale, working-class people could access affordable and secure housing. We can end the housing crisis if we stop this system of profit and pain, but the government must act now.”
Organizers are working to have demonstrations take place throughout England, and it’s something that tenants and activists in the United States and other countries can learn from.
As we pointed out a few months ago, a strong, people-power movement is needed to effectively counter the predatory business practices and big-money political influence of the real estate industry.
“Only a global people-power movement will successfully push back against billionaire corporate landlords who have the vast economic resources and political connections to run roughshod over tenants,” we wrote. “Tenants and activists don’t have their billions, and they don’t have their political connections, but tenants and activists do have something that corporate landlords don’t: the power of hundreds of millions of people unifying for more safe, affordable, and stable housing.”
Interestingly, a nationwide rent-control movement has been rising up in the U.S., but it has yet to unify through the kind of demonstrations and networking that are taking place in England right now. That needs to change.
News stories in the U.S. constantly report about seniors being forced out of their homes due to sky-high rents; working-class families facing the decision to either pay excessive rents or buy food and medications; and hard-working tenants dealing with predatory business practices by the real estate industry to jack up rents. These are life-altering issues that millions of Americans face, regardless of their political affiliations.
The RealPage scandal is a prime example of Big Real Estate’s relentless drive to push rents higher and higher no matter who gets hurt and no matter what’s happening in the rental housing market.
In 2022, a ProPublica investigation found that many of the largest corporate landlords in the U.S. used a RealPage software program to collude and wildly inflate rents in cities across the nation. That exposé resulted in numerous investigations and antitrust lawsuits filed by tenants, state attorneys general, and the Department of Justice. Rent regulations, however, would have prevented the scandal — corporate landlords would not have been able to charge exorbitant rent hikes.
In fact, Brian Callaci and Sandeep Vaheesan, of the Open Markets Institute, wrote in a white paper published at the Harvard Business Review that rent regulations are crucial in protecting tenants against predatory landlords.
“Recent research shows that the market itself needs to be fixed,” wrote Callaci and Vaheesan. “Any plan to overhaul the housing market needs to, first, confront the power of landlords to raise rents. Second, it requires rethinking public governance of housing markets behind simplistic prescriptions to just free the housing market from government regulation, assuming lower rents will follow. And third, it needs to provide more muscular government involvement in housing, through price regulation, more robust planning, and even direct public provision.”
American politicians, though, won’t act urgently unless pushed by a unified people-power movement. A nationwide, pro-rent control demonstration would not only put elected officials on notice, but would start the process of bringing together tenants and activists from across the U.S.
Patrick Range McDonald is a veteran investigative reporter and the award-winning advocacy journalist for Housing Is A Human Right.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
Another pro rent control article. When will they ever learn?
Hey, while we’re at it, let’s try communism.
Yes Alan, I guess the next generation has to learn the hard way.
When people like you learn that we need sufficient housing, people like Patrick might learn not to push for rent control.
Are you talking to me or Alan?
Both
They will never, ever build “cheap housing” in expensive places. (Even in “cheap” places, these days.)
You already know the arguments regarding displacement.
This has very little to do with NIMBYism (unless they exist in Hong Kong, as well).
By the way, have you ever noticed that just about EVERYTHING costs more in dense cities? (That is, unless you believe they’re delivering higher-quality gasoline to places like San Francisco.)
Also, there’s reasons for regulations (even more so in dense environments).
All of the commenters on here so far today (including you) came from more-expensive areas than Davis is. That’s ultimately the free market at work, itself. You don’t have a “right” to live in the town you grew up in, either.
But the reason for high prices is due to jobs (demand), not housing. We’ve all witnessed the change that occurred in the Bay Area during our lifetimes regarding that.
The people who are successful in life are those who adapt, rather than trying to make “society” itself adapt. So congratulations to everyone on here (including myself) who realized that their hometowns were not the best choice for themselves.
Three points in response…
FIRST – Job growth absolutely drives demand for housing. The question is whether cities allow housing supply to grow with that demand. When they don’t, prices rise dramatically. That’s exactly what has happened across much of coastal California.
SECOND – If you stop building housing today, you also stop creating the affordable housing of the future.
THIRD – When a city refuses to build housing, it’s not simply letting the market work—it’s deciding that only higher-income households can live there. That’s not a neutral outcome. It’s a policy choice about who gets excluded.
Not sure I’m in disagreement overall, here.
Perhaps a reason that residents and cities should carefully consider greedy, self-interested pursuits regarding “economic development” – beyond what they actually need.
Especially since it’s increasingly obvious that those interests will gladly throw existing residents “under the bus” (and they have the resources and political connections to do so).
There’s a problem when your own representatives turn against you (and it isn’t related to housing itself).
Also somewhat related to the reason for something like Measure J. The people who end up surviving the political “pre-selection” process are not normal people, and do not represent their own constituents.
Scott Wiener would not win, if there was actually a choice presented to voters.
David, we have sufficient housing in the price cohort where the vast majority of Davis real estate sales are taking place. The historical sales and current listings in Davis in the over $750,000 price bracket exceed those of Woodland. They exceed those in West Sac. They exceed those in Dixon.
What we do not have are any meaningful number of sales and or listings in the price bracket under $750,000 … ideally under $600,000.
Building more new houses with prices over $750,000 is not going to produce listings and/or sales in Davis with affordable prices under $750,000. They are two different market segments. The only way to add affordability to Davis housing is to build smaller houses on smaller lots (or with missing middle configurations) that have a full market-price value less than $600,000.
To believe otherwise is drinking Kool-Aid.
Looks like Pole Line Terrace (the site of the former skilled nursing facility) has a price list. Although the square footage is larger than I had expected, I believe these are essentially “attached” homes with a long shared driveway.
$795K (1,724 – 1,760 square feet, 3 bedrooms)
https://foutshomes.com/pole-line-terrace/pole-line-terrace-site-and-floor-plans/
Get yourself some money, folks! (That is, if there’s anyone reading this who would actually buy a new house in Davis.)
Pre-existing housing stock is a much better deal.