To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (8392 ) 11/3/1999 5:12:00 PM From: Thomas C. White Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769669
Well, as a property-owning dyed in the wool SF-er... The rent problem seldom affects long-time residents as long as they stay in the place they've been in, since almost all rental property in SF is rent-controlled and rents only increase by about the inflation rate per year. It will affect long-time residents if they are evicted and have to find a new place, or if they need to move into a larger or smaller place, etc. It will also affect long-time residents if they are living in unregistered, "illegal" units, of which there are quite a number here, and which are not subject to rent control. The stories of "exiled" longtime residents are relatively few, anecdotal, and for the most part propaganda put out by tenant activists. By far the biggest problem is for people landing a job in Multimedia Gulch, trying to move into the city and rent a place, for which you can expect to shell out around $1800 a month for a small two bedroom in any kind of a decent area. Add $400 for view... The disparity between rent-control rents and market value has led to a number of shenanigans on both sides. On the owners' sides, some of them will use any conceivable excuse to try to evict, since once the apartment is vacant, they can set the new rent at market, and then rent control steps in at the new rent. Owners are also able to evict if they elect to "owner occupy" a building, and there are some ridiculous claims arising out of this, such as someone buying a four unit building and evicting everyone, claiming that he and all his relatives will be occupying the units. On the tenants' side, there are quite a few who decide to move out of the city, secretly subletting their rent-controlled apartment at say a 150 percent markup over the rent they are paying.