21
have amended the Civil Code to provide, “Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, an owner of real property may establish
the rental rate for a dwelling unit . . . if fee title to the dwelling
unit is separate from title to any other dwelling unit or if the
dwelling unit is a subdivided interest in a subdivision . . . .”
(Ibid., § 3.)
Thus, the issue of statewide exemptions for both new
construction and single-family dwellings was before the
Legislature as it considered the Ellis Act. And among the
safeguards addressed by the May 15, 1985 amendments to
Senate Bill 505 were express provisions that the Ellis Act’s
recontrol provisions would take precedence over the vacancy
decontrol provisions of Assembly Bill 483. As the Senate
Judiciary Committee report explained, “AB 483 (Costa) would
permit landlords to increase the rental rate without regard to
local rent control laws whenever a unit was vacated under
specified circumstances . . . . In response to concerns that the
provisions of that bill do not preempt this bill if both are enacted,
this bill provides that the recontrol provisions of this bill would
prevail over the provisions of AB 483.” (Sen. Com. on Judiciary,
Analysis of Sen. Bill 505 (1985-1986 Reg. Sess.) as amended May
15, 1985, p. 9; see Assem. Com. on Judiciary, 3d reading analysis
of Sen. Bill 505 (1985-1986 Reg. Sess.) as amended Aug. 28, 1985,
p. 4 [The amended bill “[p]rovides that the recontrol provisions of
this bill would prevail over any conflicting provisions in AB 483
(Costa), if that bill is enacted”].)
Further, the May 15, 1985 amendments to Senate Bill 505
addressed Assembly Bill 483 by, among other changes, amending
the demolition recontrol provision to read that if accommodations
were demolished and new accommodations constructed on the