As Nevada continues to tackle the issue of high rents, I urge caution when politicians talk about rent control as a panacea. Rent control has many negative consequences — reduced rental quality and supply, fewer “mom and pop” landlords, etc. — but there is one less frequently discussed topic, and that is how rent control has a disproportionately negative impact on minority renters, including Hispanics.

The median household income for Latino households in Nevada was $66,100 in 2022 — lagging behind the white median income by almost $9,000 per year. The median income for Black renters was $32,600 compared to $45,310 for white renters, according to a National Association of Realtors report, making it that much more difficult for Black and brown renters to build generational wealth. 

While homeownership is often seen as the ultimate symbol of prosperity and success in America, the harsh reality is that there’s a huge racial gap between homeownership rates and rental rates. Policymakers looking for a silver bullet often look to rent control as a means to bridge the racial divide, yet nothing requires rent-stabilized unit owners to rent to low-income or to minority tenants. 

Unfortunately, economists have shown rent control has the opposite effect as what is intended and disproportionately harms non-white tenants. In New York City, on average, Black tenants in rent control-units receive $150 less than average monthly rent discounts of white tenants. For Hispanics, that number is $135 less per month and for Asian American Pacific Islanders, $43 less. 

Where cities have implemented rent control, a reduced number of new housing units, landlords’ conversion of rental units into condominiums or other ownership forms, and the dilapidation of rental units disproportionately harms minority communities as it limits their access to attainable housing in the long term. Fewer new units and increased competition for existing units exacerbates housing inequities, particularly in rapidly gentrifying areas. 

Some studies suggest that rent control may lead to a decline in property quality and maintenance as landlords delay upkeep — or shift the responsibility to their subsidized renters — due to the capped rental income. Minorities living in rent-controlled units might experience lower-quality housing as a result. This led to issues such as inadequate heating, poor sanitation and unsafe living conditions in countless cities including Boston, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles and San Francisco. In New York City, one-third of rent-regulated units had rodents, three times as much mold, twice as many toilet and elevator breakdowns, twice as many leaks and three times as many heating breakdowns as market-rate units. 

I fear policymakers who are considering rent control as a “solution” to our state and region’s housing affordability crisis are missing the mark. 

Rent control is not the way to increase the amount of affordable housing, nor is it a solution to poverty, inequality or segregation, or reducing Black, Latino and Asian barriers to homeownership. Economists for decades have outlined how rent control decreases housing supply, decreases property values and property taxes, kills jobs and is worse off for people of color. 

Nevada is renowned in so many areas — entertainment, hospitality, mining, water conservation and now sports, just to mention a few. Nevadans are innovators and problem solvers. We strive for ingenuity. We must draw on our strengths to tackle the issue of rapidly increasing rents; not copy other cities’ already failed attempts. Instead of looking outside for solutions, we need to do what we do best: tackle our housing crisis with creative solutions and reject rent control.

Peter Guzman is the president of the Latin Chamber of Commerce Nevada.

The Nevada Independent welcomes informed, cogent rebuttals to opinion pieces such as this. Send them to submissions@thenvindy.com.