Being a small town with a lot of rentals, it should come as little surprise that Larkspur has found the job of enforcing local rent-control laws to be burdensome.

The City Council recently opted to scrap its registry program, an online database in which landlords were required to report their rentals, the rents charged, move-in dates and evictions.

That data is needed, the council originally agreed, to enforce the city’s local rent control and tenant protection laws.

Almost half of Larkspur’s housing are rentals and U.S. Census data from 2019 showed that 24.8% of the renters are paying 50% or more of their monthly income in rent.

In 2023, in response to local renters’ push for local rent control and tenant protections, the City Council adopted local laws. They were approved by voters in 2024 but then in November, voters rejected an initiative that would have lowered the city’s cap on rent increases.

The registry was seen as a way the city could document local rents, which would be helpful to monitor pricing and identify increases exceeding the city’s cap.

But even with software and an online portal, it’s been a lot of work for a small city. The council also opted to not charge landlords for compliance in reporting the data.

Local landlords also complained the reporting was a burden and expressed concern about keeping the rental data private. The California Apartment Association has also challenged the legality of the city’s registry requirement.

Councilman Gabe Paulson, who championed the local rent-control laws, was the lone vote opposed to rescinding the registry.

Proponents of rent control have argued that it is needed to protect affordable housing and to prevent local residents from being priced out of Larkspur by rising rents. That concern is especially important with Larkspur’s large community of seniors who are retired and living on fixed incomes.

Vice Mayor Stephanie Andre said the administrative burden and cost — $200,000 for its first year to set it up and $52,000 annually to maintain it — are too great for the city.

The cost in time and money for the city to enforce its local rent control has been an ongoing question.

With fewer than 10% of the units fully registered, City Hall faces a potentially staff-draining chore of contacting landlords and getting them to comply.

Abandoning the registry means enforcement will rely on tenants filing complaints. The city is not abandoning rent control, but it is scrapping the registry.

Having a local law in place that caps rent increases should bolster compliance by landlords as they likely want to avoid the hassle and cost of a city hall skirmish.

A 4-1 council vote to abandon the local registry is a strong political statement in the city’s effort to strike a balance between protections for tenants and landlord’s private property rights. At the same time, the city wants to avoid increasing demands on its staff and budget.