Cartoon by Jose Luis Pavon
By Luke Thomas
March 2, 2010
In a letter addressed to Board President David Chiu, Supervisors David Campos, Ross Mirkarimi and John Avalos, District 6 Supervisor Chris Daly today urged continued support of a June ballot measure proposal that aims to provide tenants most impacted by the recession temporary relief from rent increases.
According to Daly, the measure would “apply only to tenants in rent-controlled units who: 1) are paying more than 33% of their income for rent; 2) have little or no assets; and 3) are unemployed, had at least a 20% decrease in wages in the past year, or receive only government benefits with no cost of living increase.”
Daly’s letter is in response to a March 1 letter by Mayor Gavin Newsom urging the measure’s backers to withdraw their support for the initiative. In his letter, Newsom cites “operational and legal” problems with the measure.
With a current unemployment rate of over 9 percent in San Francisco and as many as 560,000 renters, the measure is likely to garner sweeping support at the ballot box.
The ballot initiative has the backing of a majority of members on the Board of Supervisors as well as tenant and community organizations, including the San Francisco Tenants Union, SOMCAN, St. Peter’s Housing Committee, Community Tenants Association, Housing Rights Committee, and Central City SRO Collaborative. It is opposed by Supervisors Bevan Dufty, Michela Alioto-Pier, Sean Elsbernd and Carmen Chu; Plan-C, Small Property Owners of San Francisco and the San Francisco Apartment Association.
More Info
Luke Thomas
Luke Thomas is a former software developer and computer consultant who proudly hails from London, England. In 2001, Thomas took a yearlong sabbatical to travel and develop a photographic portfolio. Upon his return to the US, Thomas studied photojournalism to pursue a career in journalism. In 2004, Thomas worked for several neighborhood newspapers in San Francisco before accepting a partnership agreement with the SanFranciscoSentinel.com, a news website formerly covering local, state and national politics. In September 2006, Thomas launched FogCityJournal.com. The BBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News, New York Times, Der Spiegel, San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Magazine, 7x7, San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco Bay Guardian and the San Francisco Weekly, among other publications and news outlets, have published his work. Thomas is a member of the Freelance Unit of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, TNG-CWA Local 39521 and is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.
Follow Me:
The Hunger Site
March 3, 2010 at 3:27 pm
Is anyone aware of any recent, independent — and I emphasize “independent” — study of the effects, if any, between rent control on the quantity or quality of housing in San Francisco? Clearly, rent control can combat out of control housing prices. It allows tenants to devote a smaller percentage of their income to rent allowing them to spend their money elsewhere. This is extremely beneficial for low income or fixed income renters, especially during a recession. But how does rent control effect the general population of renters and potential renters?
Rents serve to compensate housing providers of existing housing units and developers of new units for the cost of providing shelter and provide economic incentives needed to attract new investment in rental housing, as well as maintaining existing housing stock. Has rent control inhibited new construction in San Francisco or led to the deterioration of existing housing by abandonment of unprofitable property or by condominium or cooperative conversions or Ellis Act evictions?
Many economists argue that rent control reduces the quality and quantity of housing available. San Francisco rent control advocates argue that San Francisco is unique because we have limited space to expand, the City is densely populated, and zoning and anti-growth ordinances means that San Francisco will add too few units to make a significant dent in the City’s housing shortage. To prevent an exodus of the middle class workforce, due to lack of affordable housing, would have dire consequences on the City’s economy. The ability of this work force to be able to live a middle class life style and afford shelter is essential. Thus, the argument goes, for the City, as a whole to prosper, rent control is essential. Is this true?
A study of the long term effects of San Francisco’s rent control on the quantity and quality of its housing would be useful to inform our politicians and the general public about rent control issues.
March 2, 2010 at 3:18 pm
This is not a good idea. It’s well intentioned but will actually cause the price of housing to go up instead of down. The problem is that when the old tenent moves out the landlord jacks up the rent to compensate for the longer termers, so one person is paying $250 a month and the guy next door is paying $1500. (true example of my old apartment) Rent control and other forms of government boneheaded programs are one of the main reasons rent is so high here and why the buildings are in such bad shape. PS I bet they don’t have this law in Fairfield.
March 2, 2010 at 2:47 pm
To be honest Daly is not the smartest of our supervisors.
Let’s look at the long term effects of this Policy if adopted. Who pays for these rent subsidies? It penalizes Landlords who already rent to the more vulnerable.
As is already evident Landlords are doing everything they can to get out of the rental business. That is why there are so many TICs. Why even rent an apartment when you can sell it? The landlords who do stay in the rental business get to choose their tenants when they apply. So who would they rent a vacant unit to, a family, the elderly? Landlords choose to rent to students and young single folk who will vacate quickly. It used to be that Landlords wanted a steady trust worthy tenant. Now Landlords look for tenants who will move on as their life changes.
If San Francisco really wants to help people with their rent in these hard times, may be all of San Francisco should pay for it. Increase local taxes on everyone including renters and property owners. Spread the pain evenly.
This Hardship measure is just one more reason to evict tenants and turn properties into TICs, it will soon be cheaper to leave an apartment vacant and realize the gain, than to rent and face the economic price of selling with a tenant.
It is hard for me to understand what is going through the minds of people like Daly when every day I see real effects of their policies. San Francisco is worse off with these types of short sighted policies.
March 2, 2010 at 1:24 pm
I’m amazed that Chris would even feel the need to shore up support for this measure. Are his colleagues (save Eric Mar) seriously considering balking … again? One of the things I was thinking about is “The Obama Effect” (FYI: I coined the term). Whether they know it or not, Obama seems to set the tone for every elected leader on the left, from congress right down to dog catcher. When they see Obama compromise, they also — whether consciously and subconsciously — feel the pull to lower their own expectations, rhetoric, and, most alarmingly, deeds. There is a crisis of confidence and will-power on the left.