Half Moon Bay scopes an end to rent control

These programs are ill-suited for a city the size of Half Moon Bay, Mayor Debbie Ruddock said, who has voted against both rent control and the rental registry several times. 

“Are there renters that need help here in Half Moon Bay? No question about it. Are rents too high? Absolutely. Are the current programs at an appropriate scale for a city of approximately 12,000 people? I don’t think so,” she said. “I don’t think it’s the right fit in terms of scale for our community.” 

Ruddock did express support for increasing tenant help services, like legal aid or rental assistance. 

Two other councilmembers, Paul Nagengast and Patric Bo Jonsson, also expressed support for ending the rent control program. In coming months, staff will bring that update back to the City Council for a formal vote, as well as various options for the rental registry, including ending it in perpetuity or keeping it as a standalone. 

Currently, the city’s rent control ordinance sets a maximum annual rent adjustment to the lesser of 3% or an 80% cap in changes to the consumer price index, which continually adjusts and is linked to the price of common goods. This applies to multiunit properties built before Feb. 1, 1995, with a $286 per year fee for each unit. 

The registration program set up in tandem with rent control policies requires all property owners to register their rental units with a $75 per year fee. 

Program data shows that as of Jan. 1, 586 units have been registered, exceeding the number of units the city originally estimated. In May 2025, 377 units in Half Moon Bay were rent controlled, although the city could not immediately provide up-to-date data. 

Nine rental units have left the rental registry since its inception, which former Half Moon Bay Councilmember Harvey Rarback argued during public comment dismissed arguments from landlords that rent control would drive property owners out of the city. 

“Contrary to what a lot of speakers have talked about, the people who really benefit from this are not here, mostly because they’re scared of showing up in public,” he said. “There are nine units that have been removed out of 1,500, so the housing stock is still there. This is just fear-mongering.” 

Vulnerable populations like immigrants who benefit from increased tenant protections could not speak up for themselves at the City Council meeting because they are fearful of punitive action, Vice Mayor Deborah Penrose also said. 

“There aren’t very many tenants in the house who [aren’t] a Realtor,” she said. “The reason we don’t have tenants in the house is that they’re scared out of their wits they’re going to be arrested, going to be shot, going to be put on a boat to Venezuela or another country. … We’ve heard one side of the story.” 

The one side of the story heard at public comment was largely the landlord’s perspective, many of whom argued that rent control did not keep pace with rising costs required to own and maintain a property and that both rent control and rental registry fees were excessive. 

Real estate broker Bryan Jacobs said he was helping a client sell a three-unit building because rent control had become too burdensome, but was struggling to find buyers for that same reason. 

“She decided, ‘I need to sell the property, I can’t keep up with this,” he said. “When trying to sell that property, I’ve had five buyers come to the property, look at the rent stabilization and say ‘this is not feasible.’” 

Rent control keeps residents housed and off the streets and provides a net social good, Councilmember Robert Brownstowne argued. 

“Without some kind of rental control, there may be increasing overcrowding, may be more evictions because people can’t pay their rent, more homelessness,” he said. “With these programs, I think eviction rates are being reduced and there’s less homelessness.”