How are you voting on Prop 10 regarding rent control? (San Jose: lease, to buy)

[TCROX]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

The new and much vaunted wave of dems, IE, Democratic Socialists are now openly advocating that the means of production not be with companies. Communism. Case closed. They and other leftists need to go to that paradise of Venezuela.

Yep ! their case is closed... well put! Many places for them to go - none of them have the guts to do it-

[TCROX]

Originally Posted by jm1982

No on 10 . It’ll make the housing situation worse. Just on principle though think about how wrong it is to tell a private property owner what they can charge for rent .

I’m sure the people voting Yes wouldn’t like the government telling them what they can sell their used car etc .
“Your Honda is worth $10,000 but you have to sell it for $5000 “

How is that fair ?

I’d like to see rent control abolished everywhere .
Minimum wage is another horrible thing .

Maybe our President can do an executive order .

Federal involvement is coming- yes it is...

[alliance]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

So how to the fine people of SF and areas surrounding feel about Prop10? Any idea? I always appreciate a voice from those who actually lives in the area instead of opinions voiced from far away.

No idea. I tend to stay out of political discussion here if possible. If it ever got out that I were to present an alternative viewpoint/perspective that doesn't tow the line I would be labelled a bigot, racist, sexist, anti-lgbt, etc etc. This isn't an exaggeration. You have no idea how much blind hate I've heard towards the rest of the country during random "discussions." So no, I stay out of it, if for only my own preservation. If I hadn't sold my business and it got out that I didn't agree with any of the far left propaganda I have no doubt that certain people would attempt to destroy my business and my livelihood, as they've done to other businesses in the country who lean the wrong way. Especially within the Mecca of liberalism itself.

It's the most tolerant place in the world. Haven't you heard? Just as long as you agree with them.

[alliance]

One thing that hasn't been discussed is what happens if prop 10 passes to the places that are already rent controlled, but just not rent controlled enough...

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Berkeley:

https://www.berkeleyside.com/2018/08...ovember-ballot


Some good tidbits:

"Berkeley is asking voters to approve updates to the city’s rent-control ordinance in November, to go into effect only if the California law restricting rent control is repealed.

State Proposition 10, also on the ballot in November, would repeal Costa Hawkins, which introduced rent-control restrictions statewide in 1995. If Proposition 10 passes, Berkeley will automatically return to its original 1980 rent-control ordinance, unless the new local measure amending it is also passed."

"Costa Hawkins mandated vacancy decontrol, meaning owners of rent-controlled properties can raise rents to market-rate when a tenant leaves. If the law is repealed, Berkeley will revert to its original “vacancy control” system, allowing only small annual increases, even when there’s tenant turnover. The new measure, however, would keep prior vacancy-decontrol increases intact, starting rent control from whatever a unit’s existing rent is after the election."

You read that correctly. Rent will be completely fixed going forward. Meaning, even if you have a new tenant you have to basically pick up the rent as you left off from the previous tenant. "Market rate" is in essence outlawed.
At least you have the opportunity to get that rent up as far as possible before the election. This is the new ceiling going forward, literally indefinitely.


"If approved by voters, the measure will return Berkeley to its system of rent control, but exempt newly constructed buildings for 20 years"

Currently rent control only applies to buildings built before 1980 in Berkeley (it's in the 70s for SF). This would extend the law to include anything built that is older than 20 years, which is rolling going forward. Suddenly a whole lot more buildings will be forced to fix their rent that previously didn't have to deal with this. Talk about an instant loss in value to property. Poor saps who decided to invest in a building built in 1981...

So the question is, is new development worth it if you have 20 years to benefit from market rate (which will actually skyrocket if this is instituted due to a plummet in housing inventory), knowing that after 20 years you are stuck at that rate? God forbid a dramatic downturn in the economy 21 years after building and you have to lower your rent, cause you're stuck at that rate going forward...


And a good one from the Mayer himself:

“If it wasn’t for rent control, I wouldn’t be mayor of Berkeley,” he said. “I can’t afford the cost of housing in this city on my salary. Thankfully I live in a rent-controlled unit. That’s provided a great deal of stability for me and my co-tenants. Voters of Berkeley have said time and time again they support a system of rent control.”



Also, don't ignore the consequences that this type of legislation would have on other markets that currently have rent control. They are watching, and something like this would spread like wildfire. Maybe even Sacramento would make it statewide?


Liberalism, the gift that keeps on giving.


My favorite story regarding rent control in SF:

I was looking at an open house down the street from me a couple years back, just out of curiosity. It's a massive house, that happens to have a small living space in the basement. The current owners had an older lady living there for a long time. However, the place was classified as a two unit rental property since there was a tenant technically living in a separate dwelling within the premises. Because of rent control and renters rights the lady had to stay if she wanted to even after the sale of the house, and at the current fixed rate. I asked the realtor about it being an owner-occupied building, but he said that didn't apply for some reason (does it not apply in SF? I honestly don't know) and that legally they had no choice in the matter. As such, I joked that you are basically buying a roommate (since the rent was basically nothing). He didn't seem amused, as he was probably concerned about the impact on the sales price. Well, never fear, it sold for over 2 million after a bidding war. Only in San Francisco...

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by artillery77

Vote no on 10. Rent controls don't work and if it passes I'm going to have to raise my rental rates on my tenants so I don't get locked in too low.

This is the part of rent control that many renters and others supporting rent control don't see.

[ysr_racer]

I'm going to come out and say it, if you're an adult, and still renting by the time you're 40, you've made some bad choices in life.

Now you have to deal with them.

Why should I as a landlord be punished for your bad choices?

[alliance]

Originally Posted by ysr_racer

I'm going to come out and say it, if you're an adult, and still renting by the time you're 40, you've made some bad choices in life.

Now you have to deal with them.

Why should I as a landlord be punished for your bad choices?

Because you made bad choices by being a landlord in california?

[jm1982]

It just seems unAmerican to tell private property owners how much they can charge in rent doesn’t it ?

[ysr_racer]

Originally Posted by alliance

Because you made bad choices by being a landlord in california?

How much do you make? I think it should be reduced by 25%. Are you ok with that?

[JohnSoCal]

Originally Posted by jm1982

It just seems unAmerican to tell private property owners how much they can charge in rent doesn’t it ?

As I am sure you are well aware, all liberals and their policies are very unAmerican.