Ninth Naval District Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Major naval installations with a considerable number of personnel assigned in this district are located for the most part near cities that remain under rent control, and therefore no problem has been experienced. Only two large naval installations are in decontrolled localities: The commanding officer, Naval Ammunition Depot, Hastings, Nebr., reports moderate rent increases averaging 10 percent or less since decontrol in that community. Naval activities in Omaha, Nebr., report sharply increased rents in that city since decontrol, and cite instances of rent increases averaging 26 percent. It is stated that if the number of military personnel in Omaha should be increased, some form of rent control would be a necessity. Eleventh Naval District Arizona, south California, and Nevada. As of March 1, 1951, a random sample survey was made of naval, military, and civilian personnel renting privately owned housing in San Diego, Calif., Coronado and Long Beach, Calif., to determine the effect of rent decontrol in these communities. The survey was limited to personnel renting privately owned housing at the time of decontrol, i. e., Long Beach, January 20, 1950; San Diego, September 1, 1950; Coronado, December 8, 1949. There is included a random sampling at all major naval activities in the communities under consideration, and results were summarized as follows: San Diego area (except Coronado) (a) Number of cases interviewed, 320. (b) Number of rent raises since decontrol, 167. (c) Percentage of personnel experiencing rent increase since decontrol, 52 percent. (d) Number of rent raises in subparagraph (b) of personnel paying less than $50 per month, 42. (e) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol of persons paying less than $50 per month rent, 18 percent. (f) Number of cases rent increases in (b) now paying between $50 and $85 per month rent, 103. (g) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol, of personnel now paying between $50 and $85 per month rent, 18% percent. (h) Number of cases of rent increases in (b) now paying more than $85 per month rent, 22. (i) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol, of personnel now paying more than $85 per month rent, 21 percent. Coronado (a) Number of cases interviewed, 74. (b) Number of rent raises in subparagraph (a) since decontrol, 34. (c) Percentage of cases experiencing rent increases since decontrol, 46 percent. (d) Number of cases in (b) now paying less than $50 per month rent, 8. (e) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol, of personnel now paying less than $50 per month rent, 22 percent. (f) Number of cases of rent increases in subparagraph (b) now paying between $50 and $85 per month rent, 17. (g) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol, of personnel now paying between $50 and $85 per month rent, 18 percent. (h) Number of cases in subparagraph (b) of personnel receiving rent increases who are paying more than $85 per month rent, 9. (i) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol, of personnel paying more than $85 per month, 30 percent. Long Beach (a) Number of cases interviewed, 594. (b) Number of cases in (a) who have received rent increases since decontrol, 141. (c) Percentage of cases receiving increases since decontrol, 24 percent. (d) Number of cases in (b) now paying less than $50 per month rent who have received increases, 77. (e) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol, of personnel now paying less than $50 per month rent, 20 percent. (f) Number of cases of rent increases in (b) now paying between $50 and $85 per month rent, 60. (g) Percentage increase in rent since decontrol, of personnel now paying between $50 and $85 per month rent, 13% percent. (h) Number of cases of rent increases in (b) of those now paying more than $85 per month rent, 4. (i) Percentage increase in rents since decontrol, of personnel now paying more than $85 per month rent, 13 percent. It is considered that the foregoing survey, while limited in extent due to time limitations required, is fairly representative of the effect of rent decontrol in these communities. Very few isolated cases of excessive rent increases were encountered and it is believed that those isolated cases were largely due to poor landlord-tenant relations, necessity for landlord's possession, and other considerations without an economic basis. In the San Diego and Coronado communities, it is noted that the largest increases exist in the high rental group with approximately 18 percent increases in the low-rental group evident in all three communities. The Commandant, Marine Corps, reports increases of approximately 30 percent as prevalent in the area near Camp Pendleton, Oceanside, Calif. Twelfth Naval District Northern California. Clearfield: Naval supply depot personnel report rent increases averaging 13 percent. Moffett Field, naval air station: Personnel report rents in area increased 33 percent. Tilburon, net depot: In only three instances reported, increases averaged 48 percent. No other naval installations in this district have been affected by decontrol, as the major centers of population near naval activities remain under control. Thirteenth Naval District Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana. The district commandant reports that upon rent decontrol in April 1948, the City of Bremerton Rent Advisory Board publicly requested citizens to bring complaints of rent increases to its attention. To date less than two dozen complaints of unfair rent increases have been made. These have been adjusted and the differences amount to little. There is no evidence to indicate that there have been marked increases in rents in Bremerton and vicinity since mobilization activity began. Reports from both military and civilian housing offices in Bremerton area indicate that there is very little of any rent gouging. The city of Seattle remains under rent control, and no evidence in either direction has been received from other communities. Fourteenth Naval District Hawaiian Islands. The district commandant states that rent control on the island of Oahu (Honolulu, Pearl Harbor) has been extended by local option to June 30, 1951. He recommends that in view of the acute housing shortage in the area, it is highly desirable that controls be continued until such time as title VIII housing is available to absorb personnel augmentation resulting from the current emergency situation. The planned title VIII housing program for Hawaii (projects approved by SecNav) is 355 units at Barber's Point (Oahu) and 962 units near Pearl Harbor. Washington, D. C., area Data reported by activities in Virginia forming part of the Washington, D. C., housing area, do not indicate any critical rise in rents of Virginia residents since decontrol of the State of Virginia. The naval air station, Anacostia, reports 4 rent increases out of 16 rental units surveyed, these increases averaging 17 percent. The naval receiving station, Anacostia, reports 5 rent increases out of 17 rental units surveyed, these increases averaging 26 percent. Other smaller activities in this area report rent increases, but do not indicate a sampling to give the incidence of these increases. Wherry housing has prevented Over-all increase 15 percent with- Rents increased from 75 to 100 Private off-base housing con- No increase of activities at base Most housing of AF personnel All units temporary decontrolled Construction prior to February crease of 15 percent granted |