Q&A: Rent Stabilization in Takoma Park

Q&A on Rent Stabilization in Takoma Park by Community Vision for Takoma (CVT)

(A working document, comments welcome).

Do you care about housing justice in Takoma Park? Then consider following the City Council’s new review of what may be the single most impactful law our small city has ever passed: Our Rent Stabilization ordinance. To help residents prepare to take part in this process, the 15 Questions & Answers below offer an overview of the current law – and what’s at stake in its review and potential revision.

Question 1: What is Takoma Park’s Rent Stabilization Law all about?

Answer: Takoma Park’s ordinance is apparently the oldest continuously in-effect law in the State of Maryland that stabilizes rent. The first version of our law was passed in 1980.1 (More than 200 other local governments as well as two states – Oregon and California – and the District of Columbia2 now have such a law as well.) Our law requires most landlords who rent out multifamily buildings or individual condominium units to limit their annual rent increases to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index from the year before. (For 2025, the maximum increase allowed is 2.4%.)

The first version of our law was passed in 1980.1 (More than 200 other local governments as well as two states – Oregon and California – and the District of Columbia2 now have such a law as well.) Our law requires most landlords who rent out multifamily buildings or individual condominium units to limit their annual rent increases to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index from the year before. (For 2025, the maximum increase allowed is 2.4%.)

However, there are several landlord exemptions available even for those types of housing – including for units that are federally subsidized. Also, for entire buildings, if they operate under a contract with a government agency that requires at least half the units to be affordable for residents with low or moderate incomes. Owners of newly constructed multi-family rental facilities can also apply for a five year exemption. And the law does not apply to single-family rental housing or accessory dwelling units. In fact, just 1,636 of the 3,217 rental units in the City – about half — were rent-stabilized, as of 2023.5

For more details, you can read the law here.

Q2: How has Rent Stabilization impacted our community?

A: Rent stabilization has contributed significantly to the stability and resilience of our Takoma Park community. It has succeeded in preserving an unusually dense supply of affordable housing in high-priced Montgomery County. (Median rent was $1,318 in Takoma Park, compared to $1,957 in the County, as of 2022.)6

By preserving such reliable affordable housing, the law has played a major role in preserving our economic and racial diversity.7 (That’s not surprising, given the evidence that rent stabilization is a powerful tool for racial justice.) It has enabled Takoma Park to provide housing access to residents from near and far who can plant new roots and raise their children in a community with strong schools and good local services.

And there is evidence that rental communities in our City really are more stable: As of 2022, the median number of years Takoma Park renters have lived in their home is 7 years, compared to just 4 years in the County, which is just starting its own rent stabilization program.8 Rent stabilization has not only directly benefited many Takoma Park residents who rent, of whom a high proportion are residents of color. It has also promoted a broad sense of stability and community-wide security that contributes to the health of our whole city.9


Q3: Overall, what percentage of Takoma Park household are renters?

A: Takoma Park is a densely populated municipality of about 2.1 square miles with an ethnically and economically diverse population of about 17,500 people. About 48% of all households rent their homes. By comparison, about 35% of all households in Montgomery County rent their homes.10


Q4: What about the buildings that are fully exempted from our Rent Stabilization Law because the owners have signed a government contract to limit the rent for at least half of their units? How high are the rents for units that are not included in that protected proportion that must be affordable? And what’s the total number of units in each of those buildings that are not protected at all from hefty rent increases, either by our law or by those government contracts?

A: We urge the Council to ask staff to provide the data to fully answer this question – and to evaluate how total rents and the pattern of annual increases in rents in those uncovered units compare to buildings that are under our law. Note, though, that most renters in the City are either covered by the law or live in units subsidized or rent-regulated in some way by a government agency.


Q5: But is rent stabilization fair to landlords, who are trying to make a living, or does it force them to basically subsidize their own rentals?

A: The law specifically recognizes the value of allowing landlords to get a fair return on their investments. They are able to petition for special increases, beyond the year’s approved percentage increase. They can do so if they find themselves in any particular year in circumstances that require a higher rent to pay the costs of maintaining the safe, quality housing that residents deserve, while making a fair return for their own businesses. More details about such “Fair Return” rent increases are here. (Staff have stated that landlords have made limited use of Fair Return applications. A review to verify if that reflects satisfaction with increases allowed or some issue with the process – such as ease in navigating it or being informed about it – could be part of the rent-stabilization review.)


Q6: CVT alerted residents earlier this year about political pressures for a new Maryland State law to prohibit any local government from including something called “Vacancy Control” in its rent-stabilization law. What’s that all about, and how would it affect Takoma Park?

A: A major goal of rent stabilization is to protect stability and affordability for current and future tenants. After a tenant moves out can the landlord raise the amount of rent to market rate, or is the current rent for the year offered to new tenants? Keeping the rent level for the next tenant after the prior tenant vacates an apartment unit is called “vacancy control.” Allowing the rent to float up to market rates between tenants – often to levels which prospective new tenants can no longer afford – is called “vacancy decontrol.”

Affordable housing advocates stress the importance of vacancy control because it helps protect tenants from displacement and prevents a loss of reasonably priced rental housing. They fear that vacancy decontrol creates an incentive for landlords to displace long-term tenants and to select tenants who are more mobile and have higher incomes. The laws for both Takoma Park and the County include vacancy control. The effort to ban such provisions failed this year (2025) in the Maryland legislature, so our policies are still in effect. Locally, high-level support for vacancy control among both City and County elected officials was reaffirmed in March 2025. 11


Q7: Has rent stabilization stifled development of new multifamily rental buildings in the City?

A: Opponents of the City’s rent stabilization law often make this claim. However, they haven’t been able to offer persuasive evidence that a lack of new development is caused by rent stabilization. There’s good reason to doubt that assertion. A 2017 report to the City Council from a housing consultant, for example, concluded otherwise. One of its “key findings”: There has been little new development in Takoma Park for years because the City – which is just over 2 square miles in size – was already densely developed.12

More recently, a major new opportunity for considerable new housing has opened up at Hospital Hill, the site of the former Washington Adventist Hospital. And another site, owned by a church on New Hampshire Avenue, is already being planned for development, which will include 78 new affordable units for seniors.

Moreover, the results of a number of studies across the nation show that, in general, rent stabilization does not appear to stifle new housing development. For example, a 2021 national review of research on rent stabilization, in a report from the University of Minnesota, concluded: “Little empirical evidence shows that rent control policies negatively impact new construction. [highlighting in original] Construction rates are highly dependent on localized economic cycles and credit markets. Additionally, most jurisdictions with rent stabilization specifically exclude new construction from controls, either in perpetuity or for a set period of time.”13

In fact, Michael Bodaken, Adjunct Professor at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy and former head of the National Housing Trust, testified to the Montgomery County Council in 2023 on just this point: “The evidence shows that overall market conditions, interest rates, costs of materials, and zoning have much more influence over new housing supply than rent regulations,” he wrote. “This is particularly the case in prosperous locations like Montgomery County.”

And nearly three dozen economists in 2023 published a letter making a strong case for expanding rent regulations – pointing to “substantial empirical evidence that rent regulation policies do not limit new construction, nor the overall supply of housing.”


Q8: Does rent stabilization make it hard for landlords to afford proper maintenance and so lead to the deterioration of the City’s rental housing stock?

A: We aren’t aware of any local study on this question, which we agree is an important one to evaluate. One goal of such an evaluation should be how to use and preserve our law while making sure the overall impact of local City and County regulations, code enforcement, and financial incentives support landlords’ efforts to keep their properties in good condition.

It is notable that the same 2021 national review of rent stabilization found: “There is little evidence that rent regulations cause a reduction in housing quality. Some evidence shows that major capital improvements keep pace with need but that more aesthetic upkeep may suffer. Most programs allow for the pass-through of capital improvement costs.”


Q9: In Takoma Park, given the age of many of our rent-stabilized buildings, wouldn’t it help if City policies strongly encouraged landlords to maintain the quality of our affordable housing stock so we don’t lose it?

A: Yes. In fact, a 2018 study14 funded by a national group representing multifamily apartment landlords concluded that even under actual rent control (vs. our more flexible form of rent stabilization): “There is no clear association documented in the empirical research between rent control and building quality, particularly if other ordinances, requirements, or incentives are present to have landlords maintain buildings.”

So, any City review of our Ordinance should carefully evaluate whether we and the County have the right mix of such requirements. For example, this could include a review of how thorough and timely inspections and enforcement of housing codes are, as well as evaluating incentives, such as sharing costs of improvements or extending tax breaks related to repairs when appropriate.

Also, the review should pay special attention to an emerging maintenance challenge: New County energy standards. The County Council recently passed mandatory new Building Energy Performance Standards. These may require a review of cost-sharing options to help the owners of multi-family rental buildings that are rent stabilized comply. Each building in the County that is 25,000 sq. ft. in size or more has its own “site energy use intensity” (site EUI) standard that it must reach by a certain deadline. (A list that includes all the multi-family buildings in our City that must meet such standards and their deadlines is available here.) Site EUI is a measure of the energy use per gross square foot of building area each year. Each building’s final performance standard is based on what the building is used for.

Q10: Does rent stabilization tend to promote a decline in the total amount of rental housing units? Does it create an incentive for owners to either convert their properties to condominiums or tear them down and totally rebuild, or to sell to other developers who will do so?

A: This question, to our knowledge, has not been carefully evaluated locally. We urge the City Housing staff to compile and share data on condo conversions of rent-stabilized units in Takoma Park. The 2021 nationwide review did find that research shows, in general, that rent regulation “is related to an overall reduction in units.” However, other research demonstrates that’s not always the case, and that carefully written laws can avoid loopholes that encourage condo conversions.15 Depending on what a local analysis would show, if necessary, the City could follow other cities’ lead and add focused regulations to encourage landlords to stay in the rental housing market and continue providing affordable housing.

And consider this: When affordable rental units are converted to affordable condominiums or affordable cooperatives – which has happened in Takoma Park with the aid of the City and County – the change can provide affordable options for home ownership to residents with modest incomes who otherwise would not be able to afford buying a home. Given the importance of home ownership to building generational wealth, the equity impact of such conversions is also of value.

Q11: Why is the City Council reviewing our Rent Stabilization Ordinance now?

A: One reason: During the review of the Minor Master Plan Amendment (MMPA), a re-zoning plan, the City was pressured by the County Planning Board and the County Council to review the City’s rent stabilization law.

Separately, the Mayor and some Councilmembers seem supportive of a major review as well. The new City Council has included a review of the City’s ordinance as part of its official “Council Priorities” over this Council’s two-year term (which runs through October 2026). To date, it seems fair to say that the Mayor, some Councilmembers, and staff have expressed more interest in identifying revisions that might increase developers’ incentives to build more housing units – whether affordable or not – than on changes that could strengthen tenant protections or overall housing resilience.

Q12: What role do our Rent Stabilization Law and other tenant protections play in meeting the City’s major housing goals and challenges?

A12: This is a good question, deserving a full evaluation in any major review of the law. But we can make some preliminary observations. The Council, in its 2019 Housing and Economic Development Strategic Plan, prioritized three main housing objectives: Preserve, Produce, and Protect. The objective to protect was defined as: “Protect renters, homeowners, and local businesses from discrimination and displacement; and protect our environment from destruction.”

Notice the inclusion of language about protecting residents from displacement. City staff later reframed those objectives in 2024 as “stability, choice, and quality,” in a way that arguably de-emphasizes protecting residents from displacement.

     Stability was defined by staff as “the ability of residents to remain in their community.” Stability for residents renting in multi-family buildings is significantly advanced by the City’s Rent Stabilization policies. And stability among residents – whether they rent or own – is arguably threatened by high property taxes and rents.

     Choice was defined as residents’ ability “to choose and find housing that fits their life situations.” Choice is limited among certain housing types, notably duplexes, triplexes and townhomes and, for homebuyers, within certain price brackets, especially low to moderately priced single-family homes. A factor that impacts all housing choices is the limited availability of developable land. We note again this key finding of the 2017 City-funded study: “Because Takoma Park is mostly built out, there is little new residential construction.”

     Quality was defined as “safe, healthy and contains all amenities for comfort.” While various enforcement mechanisms attempt to address quality, how well the City’s many aging multi-family rental buildings are being maintained is a particular concern. A full analysis, including building-by-building evaluations of the need for repairs, would be a good first step to begin prioritizing this major issue. 

Clearly, rent stabilization and other tenant protections play a key role in achieving the City’s overall housing goals – serving current residents but also new residents.  Any policy that might lead to displacement is directly at odds with the City’s goals.

Q13: What other City policies significantly impact our housing?

A: Takoma Park’s suite of housing policies and programs work across the Stability-Choice-Quality framework, some clearly prioritizing housing justice in terms of promoting safe, affordable, well-maintained, stable shelter.

These programs include, for example, grant assistance with down payments for first-time home buyers who are income eligible and the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Law, which since 1986 has given tenants a right of first refusal when a landlord decides to sell. Together, these policies have supported numerous residents, on their own or organizing with other tenants, to transition from renting to home ownership without moving. This can help residents of more modest means, who are disproportionately families of color, begin to build the kind of generational wealth and stability that has historically been disproportionately available to white families. (A success story that, on paper, is a “loss” of rental housing units, but is also a gain for the individuals involved and, at least in some ways, for our community.)

Another set of City policies offer other protection for renters, including Rental Assistance and Tenant Protection from Displacement programs.

There are also significant new City and County policies, whose impacts on housing it’s too soon to evaluate fully. The City’s new Housing Property Tax Credits passed in late 2024. But they will not be available until the Council has approved regulations to implement them. (As of mid-May, 2025, staff have not yet presented such regulations.) The credit for new, multifamily rental buildings would provide 10 years of full exemption from City property taxes, and five more years of partial exemption. Other, less generous tax credits would apply to  the rehabilitation of multi-family rental buildings (Council has instructed staff to flesh this idea out), and affordable housing preservation.

The Minor-Master Plan Amendment, approved in 2024 by the County Council, significantly changed zoning in the 132 acres along Maple Avenue and Flower Avenue, from Philadelphia Avenue to the west, and the Washington Adventist campus, to the east.16 The changes expand the allowable heights, floor-area-ratio (FAR) and commercial-development potential in the plan area, which includes the site of the former Adventist Hospital.

Both the new tax credit for newly constructed rental buildings and the MMPA zoning changes likely increase development potential – but also the potential for some resident displacement. 

Q14: How does the City’s Rent Stabilization Law compare with Montgomery County’s?

A: Broadly speaking, Takoma Park’s ordinance offers much stronger renter protections compared with the County’s new law. Three significant differences are:

• The exemption period from rent stabilization regulations for brand new multifamily rental buildings is 5 years in Takoma Park, vs. 23 years under the County’s law.

After a building’s “substantial” renovation, the County allows a new, 23-year period of exemption from its law. The City has no similar provision.  (Renovations that cost at least 40% of the building’s assessed value are considered substantial, under the County law.)

• The maximum annual rent increase allowed under rent stabilization under Takoma Park’s law is the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index in our area (2.4% increase allowed for 2025). Under the County law, the maximum allowed annually is either 6% or the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index plus 3% — whichever is less. (5.7% allowed for 2025).

You can compare the two sets of regulations to see all the differences here. (Link here)

Q15: What can residents do to learn more and/or advocate for the City’s Rent Stabilization and Housing policies?

A: Residents can learn more about individual policies from the Housing pages on the City Website and from our document “Selected Rent Stabilization and Housing Policy Documents”.  You can  also attend a City Council Meeting – which are most Wednesday nights at the City Community Center – when housing issues are on the agenda. You can make a 3-minute public comment in person or over Zoom at the meetings. Please also share your questions and concerns with your City Councilmember, the Mayor and the entire City Council.  Lastly, talk with your friends and neighbors to help them stay informed and engaged too.

And a special invitation: If you would like to actively work on these issues with CVT’s Housing Working Group, send an email to:  Community Vision for Takoma at tjcommunityvision@gmail.com. Feel free to also email us, at the same address, any further questions, comments, or information you have about these issues.


  1. In the early 1970s, there were both federal price controls and a statewide rent-control law in effect. After those limits were lifted and rents began rising dramatically, Montgomery County declared a public emergency and passed first a rent freeze and then a rent-control law. That law was in effect from 1973 to 1977, followed by a transitional period during which another law temporarily gave the County the authority to disapprove rent increases of more than 10% if landlords could not provide “adequate justification.” That authority expired in 1981.  Takoma Park voted in their rent stabilization in 1980. Prince George’s and Howard Counties and Rockville also had rent-control programs from 1973 to 1976.  Read about this history here (pp. 6-10, 63-64, as numbered in the pdf). More recently, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties adopted new rent-stabilization laws that took effect in 2024. The City of Mount Ranier’s new law took effect In 2023. In addition, many jurisdictions in Maryland limited rent increases early on during the COVID-19 pandemic but later lifted those limits.
    ↩︎
  2. Minneapolis Rent Stabilization Study, published by the Center for Regional and Urban Affairs at the University of Minnesota, 2021, p. 1, 4. ↩︎
  3. In the early 1970s, there were both federal price controls and a statewide rent-control law in effect. After those limits were lifted and rents began rising dramatically, Montgomery County declared a public emergency and passed first a rent freeze and then a rent-control law. That law was in effect from 1973 to 1977, followed by a transitional period during which another law temporarily gave the County the authority to disapprove rent increases of more than 10% if landlords could not provide “adequate justification.” That authority expired in 1981.  Takoma Park voted in their rent stabilization in 1980. Prince George’s and Howard Counties and Rockville also had rent-control programs from 1973 to 1976.  Read about this history here (pp. 6-10, 63-64, as numbered in the pdf). More recently, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties adopted new rent-stabilization laws that took effect in 2024. The City of Mount Ranier’s new law took effect In 2023. In addition, many jurisdictions in Maryland limited rent increases early on during the COVID-19 pandemic but later lifted those limits.
    ↩︎
  4. Minneapolis Rent Stabilization Study, published by the Center for Regional and Urban Affairs at the University of Minnesota, 2021, p. 1, 4. ↩︎
  5. Housing Annual Report, City of Takoma Park Housing and Community Development Department, Oct. 18, 2023. ↩︎
  6. Housing in Takoma Park, City of Takoma Park Housing and Community Development Department, July 1, 2024. ↩︎
  7. No racial group in Takoma Park is in the majority. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts for the City. ↩︎
  8. Housing in Takoma Park, City of Takoma Park Housing and Community Development Department, July 1, 2024.p. 14. ↩︎
  9. Minnesota Rent Stabilization Study, p. 22, in terms of the national evidence that housing stability – which our rent stabilization supports – yield strong social benefits:  “. . .  housing research overwhelmingly stresses the importance of housing stability for economic well-being and physical, emotional, and mental health (Harkness and Newman, 2005; Smith et al., 2003; Welch and Lewis, 1998; Guzman et al., 2005; Bartlett, 1997). Housing stability has been associated with greater educational achievement among children (Scanlon and Devine, 2001; Kerbow, 1996; Brennan, 2011; Newman and Holupka, 2014).
    Also, for evidence of the relationship between housing instability and significant negative physical and mental health outcomes for both adults and children, see the summary and references in “Rent Regulations and the Montgomery County Rental Housing Market,” from the County Council’s Office of Legislative Oversight, OLO Report 2023-5, p. 14. ↩︎
  10. The population density of Takoma Park is about 8,382 people per square mile. That compares, for example to about 5,276 per square mile in Bethesda, 4,961 per square mile in Rockville, and 6,741 per square mile in Gaithersburg. (Source:  U.S. Census Reporter.) Sources for proportion of households who rent their homes in Takoma Park and Montgomery County: U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts for the County and the City. Source for number of residents (individuals) who live in rented homes Is: “Facts and Figures: Summary of Census Information Through 2022,” City of Takoma Park Website. ↩︎
  11. “Good Cause/Vacancy Control Local Legislators Sign-On Letter (updated 3/14/25).” County Councilmember Kristin Mink played a leading role in organizing this effort. In addition to Mayor Searcy, Takoma Park Councilmembers Jessica Landman, Cindy Dyballa, Roger Schlegel, and Cara Honzak signed the letter. County Executive Marc Elrich, Mink, and five other County Councilmembers signed it as well. ↩︎
  12. City of Takoma Park Housing and Economic Data Analysis, The Cloudburst Group, Oct., 2017. One of the “Key Findings”, p.  13: “Because Takoma Park is largely built out, there is little new residential construction.” ↩︎
  13. Minneapolis Rent Stabilization Study, published by the Center for Regional and Urban Affairs at the University of Minnesota, 2021, p. A1. ↩︎
  14. Lisa Sturtevant, Ph.D., “The Impacts of Rent Control: A Research Review and Synthesis,” published by the National Multifamily Housing Council Research Foundation, May, 2018. ↩︎
  15. Mark Paul (an economist himself), “Economists Hate Rent Control. Here’s Why They’re Wrong,” The American Prospect, May 16, 2023. ↩︎
  16. For extensive commentary on, and the history of, the Takoma Park Minor Master Plan Amendment (MMPA), click on the link to “Affordable Housing,” on CVT’s website. ↩︎

Discover more from Community Vision for Takoma

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading