| Pied-a-Terre Options Below $300,000 | March 7th, 2009 |
|
Warning: For under $300,000 you cannot expect to get deeded parking. For under $300,000 you will have to give up on location and view. In fact, you may even be sometimes looking at a wall– or onto a street with lots of traffic (don’t worry, I wouldn’t show one of those to you without warning you first). Some agents might ‘dis me for being so up-front about the downside on these units. But I prefer to be forthright instead of wasting your time looking at things that will not match your ideal of a little condo-in-the-sky-with-Tony-Bennett views. What I CAN deliver is charming architecture in a convenient location, with hardwood floors, good, light high ceilings and tall windows. . Or you can opt for cool loft architecture South of Market. Here are three that fit that bill. 901 Bush is a recent conversion of a classic Nob Hill building at Taylor and Bush. Great location, busy street corner. 36-unit building with combination of– studios, one-bedrooms and two-bedrooms. The studios start at $299,000, with possible room in the price, depending on what you’re looking at and what floor you’re on. If memory serves, square footage is relatively decent– with 400-500 square feet to a unit. Completely remodeled kitchen and baths. 631 O’Farrell, also known as The Hamilton is one of my all-time favorite buildings in San Francisco. This Art Deco masterpiece has luscious Rococo architecture inside and out. I think of it as a Dashiell Hammett sort of place. You’ll be perfectly at home hear in your belted rain coat and fedora. Added elegance is a massive lobby, ballroom and elegant side garden. I’d throw a party here in a hot minute with a big band orchestra and martini bar. The studios at 631 O’Farrell are spacious, with sleeping alcoves and roomy living/dining combinations. Kitchens are tucked away in a corner with little counter space, but are often nicely remodeled. Because this is a high-rise, you can sometimes get wonderful downtown views from the upper floors for just a hair over that $300K mark. The downside of 631 O’Farrell is the location. You can easily walk to and from Union Square, but you have to squirm your way through a patch of the Tenderloin District to get there. The Tenderloin is one of the City’s down-and-out neighborhoods, and while 631 O’Farrell is on one of the district’s better blocks, many buyers are still uncomfortable about the location. That being said, I have seen a bit of everything among the residents, from 80-year olds heading out for shopping and tea, to young women walking home from work, to single guys. For safety, the building has a 24-hour doorman. Studio apartments at The Hamilton start under $300K and work their way up to the mid-$300K range. This is a very cool building that I would personally consider were I considering a second home in the City. Cubix is a new South of Market building on Harrison between 3rd and 4th. The best and worst thing about this building is its location. The best thing is that you are only one long block away from the City’s cultural heart, anchored by the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts and at least three museums. The downside of this location is the lack of ambiance. It’s an industrial block with a view of the elevated freeway directly across the street. Cubix is just the right name for this 98 unit building that packs in more apartments than I’ve ever seen into such a little envelope. Units run on average (if I remember correctly) 250-325 square feet and it can feel sometimes like you’re sleeping right next to your kitchen sink. The nice thing about Cubix is all the units have sleek little kitchens and baths and the ceilings go on forever, so what you lack in square feet you make up for in cubic feet (get it? that’s why it’s called ‘Cubix.’) Prices at Cubix start at $259,000, which would peg your cost at about $1,000/square foot. That seems painful to some buyers, but others don’t give a whit, because they get in the door on a piece of little San Francisco real estate for such a low cost. We do have other pied-a-terres available in new homes projects in San Francisco for under $300K. Please call me at 415-577-0809 if you would like more information. |
|
|
|
We have only three pied-a-terre options in the MLS this week that I think would hold real appeal to pied-a-terre investors. Both are in downtown locations.| Obama Wants To Help You Reduce Your Rate. . . | March 1st, 2009 |
|
Although the final operational guidelines of the Obama administration’s foreclosure-avoidance programs won’t be released until Wednesday, key details have begun surfacing on the extraordinary refinancing opportunities that will be available to an estimated 4 million to 5 million homeowners whose mortgages are owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Under the Obama plan, borrowers who have made their monthly payments on time but are saddled with interest rates well above current prevailing levels in the low 5 percent range may be eligible to refinance - despite decreases in their property values. Neither Fannie Mae nor Freddie Mac typically can refinance mortgages where the loan-to-value ratio exceeds 80 percent without some form of credit insurance. That insurance can be difficult or impossible to obtain in many parts of the country that insurers have labeled “declining” markets, with high risks of further deterioration in values. In effect, large numbers of people who bought houses several years ago with 6.5 percent or higher 30-year fixed rates cannot qualify for refinancings because their LTVs exceed Fannie’s and Freddie’s limits. Using an example supplied by the White House, say you bought a home for $475,000 in 2006 with a $350,000 mortgage at 6.5 percent that was eventually acquired by Fannie Mae. In the three years following your purchase, the market value of the house has dropped to $400,000, and you’ve paid down the principal to $337,460. If you applied for a refinancing to take advantage of today’s 5 percent rates - which would save you several hundred dollars a month in payments - you’d have difficulty because your LTV, currently at 84 percent, exceeds Fannie’s 80 percent ceiling. But under the Obama refi plan, Fannie would essentially waive that rule - even for LTVs as high as 105 percent. In this example, you’d be able to qualify for a refinancing of roughly $344,000 - your present balance plus closing costs and fees - at a rate just above 5 percent. In a letter to private mortgage insurers Feb. 20, Fannie and Freddie’s top regulator confirmed that there would be no requirement for refinancers to buy new mortgage insurance, despite exceeding the 80 percent LTV threshold. James B. Lockhart III, director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, described the new refinancing opportunity as “akin to a loan modification” that creates “an avenue for the borrower to reap the benefit of lower mortgage rates in the market.” Lockhart spelled out several key restrictions on those refinancings: – No “cash outs” will be permitted. This means the new loan balance can only total the previous balance, plus settlement costs, insurance, property taxes and association fees. – Loans that already had mortgage insurance will likely continue to have coverage under the existing amounts and terms, thereby limiting Fannie’s and Freddie’s exposure to loss. But loans where borrowers originally made down payments of 20 percent or higher will not require new insurance for the refi, despite current LTVs over the 80 percent limit. – The cutoff date for the entire program is June 10, 2010. Lockhart said that although Fannie and Freddie would be refinancing portions of their portfolios into lower interest-rate, higher LTV loans, he expects their exposure to financial loss should actually decline. “In fact,” he said, “credit risk would be reduced because, after the refinance, the borrower would have a lower monthly mortgage payment and/or a more stable mortgage payment.” This, in turn, would lower the probability of loss-generating defaults and foreclosures by those borrowers. Since Fannie and Freddie both operate under direct federal control - technically known as “conservatorship” - any additional losses to the companies would inevitably be borne by taxpayers. How it all works out may well depend on whether the Obama administration’s broader efforts to stabilize housing prices, reduce foreclosures and push the economy out of recession are successful. If large numbers of beneficiaries of these special refinancings ultimately cannot afford to pay even their cut-rate replacement rates and go into foreclosure, red ink could flow in rivers from Fannie and Freddie. But because that’s an unknown and the refi program is an immediate, here-and-now money-saving reality, homeowners ought to make the most of it. If you know that Fannie or Freddie owns or guarantees your mortgage - your loan servicer can tell you - and you’ve got an on-time payment record and an interest rate above today’s prevailing levels, start assembling your financial records and get ready to refi. |
|
|
|
Following is an article by Ken Harney in today’s Chronicle. You can find out if you have a Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac loan by calling your lender. Please keep in mind that if your loan was above the conforming loan amount at the time you bought it is probably NOT a Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac loan.| Distressed Real Estate Investors May be Able to Renegotiate Loan Terms | November 26th, 2008 |
|
The majority of the mortgage modification programs are available to only homeowners who either already are in default or are at risk of defaulting on their primary residences. But if you can’t pay the mortgage on your vacation home rather than your primary residence — you still have options. Any property owners who are in default or at-risk of defaulting should contact a reputable credit counseling agency to discuss possible options other than foreclosure. When calling a credit counseling agency, the homeowner should have their loan number, most recent mortgage statement, bank statements and a letter demonstrating financial hardship. To find a local credit counselor, visit the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Web site at or the non-profit organization National Foundation for Credit Counseling. Owners should contact their loan servicer as soon as possible to try to work out potential solutions. According to the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), some borrowers who do not meet the requirements for an existing mortgage modification program may still be considered for a loan adjustment based on personal circumstances. If a mortgage modification is not possible, owners want to consider a short sale – sell the home for less than the amount of the mortgage. Although a short sale enables an owner to avoid foreclosure and often causes less damage to a credit score than a foreclosure, the lender must agree to accept the loss and in some cases the owner may have to pay taxes on the difference. Also, many lenders are overwhelmed by the large number of short sales being submitted by homeowners, so it could take longer than usual to receive a short-sale acceptance from the lender. If an owner cannot qualify for a mortgage modification or a short sale, some lenders will consider a deed in lieu of foreclosure, where the homeowner transfers the title to the lender in exchange for debt forgiveness. Properties that have additional debt, such as home equity lines of credit or additional mortgages, may not qualify for a deed in lieu of foreclosure. Homeowners who have additional debt tied to the property must share this information with their lender for consideration when applying for a short sale. |
|
|
|
| An Exclusive Seminar From an Industry Pro | November 24th, 2008 |
|
I’ve never seen anyone synthesize information and deliver it in a more entertaining way than Carole. She’s whip-smart and very funny. And she’ll leave you informed about what’s really happening with local real estate in a way that no talking head can ever equal. Carole’s brief seminars are usually only offered to industry professionals, but for the first time she will be presenting a quickie course in ‘Real Estate Economics’ for Buyers and Sellers. Topics presented at warp speed will be: The Theory of Real Estate Economics: Add a “0” every 30 years. Date: Wednesday, December 3 If you go, you could make evening of it and follow up with dinner at Greens or somewhere on Chestnut Street. Cost is $10.00 (I swear this is better than a movie), but I have a limited number of free tickets available. Call me if you want one. 415-577-0809. |
|
|
|
Carole Rodoni is a rare combination – a real estate industry veteran with on-the-ground experience as a real estate sales person and investor. She’s an addict to any and all information about the economy. She lives and breathes CSPAN and CNN. And she’s sharp as a tack.| Reasons to Buy — | November 3rd, 2008 |
|
Leverage and Appreciation - This is one of my all-time favorite arguments for real estate over stocks and paper investments. Appreciation won’t happen overnight, but with the right property, over the long term, appreciation is a safe bet. Using leverage to acquire the property will magnify the return on investment. Appreciation of 10% on a $1MM property translates into a 50% return on investment with a 20% down payment. Real estate is one of the few investments where investors can use other people’s money to magnify their return. When the property is sold, taxes can either by avoided, or deferred. Section 121 of the tax code allows for the avoidance of taxes on a primary residence, and Section 1031 allows for the deferral of taxes on the sale on an investment property. Many sophisticated investors will combine Section 121 and 1031 together for maximum tax advantage. An example would be to convert a rental property into a primary and avoid taxes on the sale. Leonard Spoto of the Asset Exchange Company reminded me that Warren Buffett advises “be fearful when others are greedy and be greedy when others are fearful.” I’m going to start using that quote– a lot! |
|
|
|
If you’re ready to stop looking at real estate as a quick way to make money (and I bet you are!), it remains a solid investment for the following reasons:| Statistics on San Francisco Home Sales Since the Stock Market Began to Slide | October 13th, 2008 |
|
MLS Hotsheet Statistics for the last 2 weeks as of 10/13/08, Districts 1-10 New Listings Comparing this last 2 weeks with the 2-week period before: we see no cataclysmic shifts, though some definite slowing in market activity occurred:For houses, new listings were down about 12%; houses going contingent, pending and sold down about 10%; back-on-markets and price reductions up 10 – 15%; expireds stayed about the same, while withdrawns went up dramatically at 77%.For condos, the slowing was a bit more dramatic: new listings down 18% and those going contingent/pending down 27%. Condo solds and price reductions went up a little, back-on-markets went down a little; expireds up almost 100% and withdrawns up about 15%. |
|
|
|
| Affluent Baby Boomers Tighten Their Belts | June 27th, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
The economic downturn is causing some Baby Boomers to downsize or postpone retirement, but they still are in no hurry to pay off their mortgages, according to the annual “Affluent Boomers at 60″ survey from Oakland-based Bell Investment Advisors. Historically, most seniors paid off their mortgage before retiring. Not so today. More than 55 percent of those surveyed who currently hold a mortgage don’t intend to pay off their loan until their 70s, if then. That could change if the economy worsens or the slowdown is prolonged. One in four Baby boomers already are changing their retirement plans and 40 percent are “downsizing” their lifestyles. More than one quarter (28 percent) have lost a job in recent months or know someone over age 60 who has. As a result, 22 percent say they are cutting down on charitable contributions, 21 percent are changing vacation plans, 18 percent are reducing the amount they are saving, and 11 percent are postponing retirement entirely. Sixty-nine percent say the economy is causing them to change to a more conservative investment strategy. The survey included equal numbers of men and women born in 1948, all of whom reported investable assets of $1 million or more.| Another Angle on the Rental Market - “Urban Vacation Rental” | June 6th, 2008 |
|
The only thing that’s stopped me is how labor-intensive such an investment is. You’re essentially running a hotel room and I’m a real estate investor– not an inn keeper. I’ve been waiting a long time for a San Francisco new outlet to pick up on the story of investors leasing out vacation rentals in San Francisco. I know a number of landlords who have been doing it for years, so I’m happy to see super-sharp Carol Lloyd of the SF Chronicle take the time to report on it. Here’s her story, dated May 23, 2008. The Urban Vacation Rental Offers Potential Profit and Control “Charming garden apartment” in the Castro for $3,500 a month. Three-bedroom flat in Ashbury Heights — $7,000 a month. “Large one-bedroom apartment” with Golden Gate views — $6,000 a month. “Beautiful New Edwardian Victorian” in the Castro — $16,000 a month. Say what? These are the kind of rental listings that make you question your eyesight. But even if you blink and read again, the improbable numbers remain the same. It’s true, some basement flats are going for the price of three-bedroom, two-bath single family homes in the same neighborhood. And some three-bedroom, two-bath single family homes in modest neighborhoods are renting for the price of mansions in Pacific Heights. And here’s the kicker. They are actually good deals in relation to comparable accommodations. Welcome to one of the city’s little-noticed but booming surreal estate markets: the urban vacation home. San Francisco has been a mecca for tourists and business travelers for more than a century, and to meet the demand a vital hospitality industry has sprung up. Scores of high-end hotels and corporate apartments, hostels and bed and breakfasts all compete to attract the city’s yearly 16 million visitors and get a portion of the over $7 billion they spend. But in the past few years, with the rise of the Internet’s free market enterprise, the city has seen another sort of accommodation crop up: the individually owned vacation property. “There’s a huge demand,” says Justin Halloran, vice president for HomeAway, a company that owns VRBO.com (Vacation Rentals By Owner), VacationRentals.com and its namesake HomeAway.com, along with a number of other domestic and international vacation home Web sites. “The areas where we see the most demand are urban areas like San Francisco, New York and Las Vegas, where hotel prices are high and there’s a relative lack of supply,” said Halloran. Indeed, such vacation Web sites have traditionally attracted listings from second homeowners in traditional resort areas such as Lake Tahoe — currently on VRBO.com there are 695 listings for the California side of Tahoe, while there are only 200 in San Francisco. But according to Halloran, that seems to be changing with both the supply and the demand for San Francisco vacation rentals increasing rapidly. In the past 90 days, HomeAway.com’s San Francisco properties were up 41 percent and inquiries for those properties had increased 80 percent compared to the same quarter a year ago. Indeed, according to a quick and dirty survey of a dozen Web sites which list San Francisco vacation homes, more than 700 houses, flats or apartments in San Francisco are being primarily rented as temporary crash pads. That doesn’t count those properties that exclusively use Craigslist.org as their sales portal. For visitors this is great news — especially as hotel rates escalate through the roof. Renting an individual apartment or house can mean a lot more space and luxury for a fraction of the price. “We found that, priced per square foot, hotels were 50 percent more expensive than vacation homes listed on our sites,” Halloran said. The availability of these temporary rentals allows visitors to come to the city and stay in residential neighborhoods that don’t have tourist accommodations. They also attract families with children who don’t want to eat every meal in a hotel. “Our biggest customers are married women between the ages of 35 and 55 with two-ish children, who are planning a vacation for their families,” said Halloran. Although there have always been a handful of individually managed residential apartments available for vacation or short-term rental — I recall finding one for my parents a decade ago through the Noe Valley Voice — and there have always been property managers or corporate apartment agencies that offer short term housing to business travelers, the advent of by-owner vacation home Web sites has allowed a new accommodation category to blossom. According to Henry Harteveldt, a travel industry analyst, vacation homes make up a growing sector of travel accommodations, with more travelers renting vacation homes every year. But looking at the listings for San Francisco’s VRBO, another thing becomes clear. It’s also a boon for property owners who want to maximize their earning power and avoid the complications of rent control. For the property owner, running a one-unit hotel definitely has its ups and downs. Although rents have skyrocketed in the past two years, they haven’t nearly caught up with real estate prices. Even with a 20 percent down payment, the mortgage payments on $1 million home will run more than $5,000 a month for a 30-year fixed-rate loan. But can you rent out that $1 million house for $5,000? Not likely. So, for recent buyers who find themselves in a tight spot or who plan on being away from their primary residence for a portion of the year, the vacation market offers higher risks but (as they say in the biz) higher upside potential. Many of these homes can fetch as much weekly on the vacation market as monthly on the regular rental market. But even if the rates are higher than long-term rentals, so are the costs, the labor and the risks. First of all, the homes are turn-key and need to be maintained at a high standard. If an espresso maker or television breaks the homeowner will probably end up replacing it. Secondly, the homeowner pays for all the utilities, Internet connection, cable and gardening maintenance — costs that may rise or fall steeply depending on the guests’ vacation habits. There is also the unpredictable workload of booking guests, managing their complaints or requests, and managing a cleaning crew after each booking, along with the bureaucracy of small business taxes. Most importantly, homes that don’t rent enough weeks out of the year can quickly trigger a financial nightmare. Still for some homeowners, the potential earning power coupled with retaining control of one’s property far outweigh the risks — especially if the home is located in a destination neighborhood in San Francisco. One homeowner I know who bought a house with an extra rental property near North Beach claims to have discovered a proverbial gold mine in his basement flat. When previous tenants moved out, he turned the place into a vacation home. The upshot is that he’s renting out the flat almost year-round and earning double what he might otherwise earn with a long-term tenant. Plus, he still has the place available for visiting friends and family. In this land of Surreal Estate, where access to property often determines our destiny, the vacation home option is more than a micro business, it’s a strategy for retaining control of property. |
|
|
|
I’ve long been fascinated with the idea of owning a condo in San Francisco and renting it as a short-term vacation rental. It’s a great way to get a real cash-on-cash return for condo and apartment investments. It would also allow me a way to retain control of my property if its subject to rent control.| The State of the State of the San Francisco Rental Market | June 6th, 2008 |
|
Rents are up 10-15% from a year ago. According to Craigslist, most one-bedrooms rent in the $1500-3000 range, ( some can go up to $4,000), with the average being around $2500. Two-bedroom go up to $6,000, with many right in the $3200 range. A CraigsList snapshot for the day offered this much in inventory: 206 units for rent in Pacific Heights, 308 in SOMA/South Beach and 31 in the Hayes Valley. Units on the North side of town (PacHeights, Marina, Telegraph/Russian/Nob Hill, North Beach) command the highest rents. They also go faster and attract the highest quality tenants. SOMA/South Beach takes a little longer to rent. Hayes Valley is hot. Laura has a good sense of the market in this neighborhood because she handles a number of rentals in larger buildings there. Competition is fierce for units offered below $2500/month. Units at this price point usually go quickly and easily, with multiple applications. In the $2500-3500 range renters are expecting a better location and/or luxury building. Units renting in this range will sit a little longer before renting. Above $3500 requires some patience– if your place is worth that much, it will eventually rent, but it may take some time. Premiums are paid if your rental is the ‘quintessential San Francisco home’– and has updates. I.E. period architecture with remodeled baths and kitchens. Laura used 1839 Filbert as an example. Lofts go fast– especially if they’re in North of Market locations (this is a rare commodity). The relo market isn’t nearly as hot as it used to be. In previous years, transferees were a big segment of the rental market. Now, not so much. Many of Laura’s tenants can afford to buy but are choosing not to. To them, it still seems more reasonable to rent a great place for $3500/month instead of shelling out $5000/month to own it. I’m sure they understand that the after-tax costs are much lower, but we won’t go there in this post. I’ve been working with investor clients lately, and have called Laura a few times to get estimates of rental values for specific units. Generally she’s quoted me premium rents for the properties I inquire about, probably because they’re high quality condominiums. An executive studio at The Montgomery, for instance should rent for $1800-2000. A two-bedroom in the same building should go for $3400-3600. I also asked her about rental values for a couple of large two-bedroom condominiums in prime Pacific Heights. These were both in period buildings and had a lot of charm. She estimated that they could command upwards of $4,000– and maybe go as high as $5,000. Both of these places had parking. Two great links to learn more about the rental market in San Francisco: Laura’s Rental Listings on the Paragon website - fun eye candy and a great way to get a sense of what nicer places rent for. CraigsList Rental Stats - God bless the guy that runs this site. It slices and dices CraigsList rental data for San Francisco in a bunch of different ways. It’s a great way to see how much you’ll get where in the City at different price points. An article from Investment News analyzes how the strength of the rental market is related to the housing crisis. |
|
|
|
This week at our sales meeting we had our ace rental agent, Laura Gray give us an overview of the rental market. Here are her observations:| TIC and Investment Property Owners Please Read!!! 98 Is Really Great; 99 Will Make You Whine | May 12th, 2008 |
|
I am printing Sharon’s email word-for-word. I avoid the snake pit of politics whenever possible on this blog. But this stuff is important to anyone owning real estate in San Francisco, and anyone considering a purchase here: ****************************** On the June ballot there will be two competing State Propositions dealing with property rights–Proposition 98, and Proposition 99. One of the key differences is the issue of RENT CONTROL. Proposition 98 gives Californians the opportunity to END RENT CONTROL, while the competing Proposition 99 does not. Poison pill: In the event both propositions get a majority vote, Proposition 99 is written with a “poison pill” - if it receives more votes than its rival Proposition 98, )roposition 99 would be come law, and Proposition 98 would not. Therefore I urge you to VOTE YES on Proposition 98 and NO on Proposition 99. Please note an important feature of prop 98 - tenants currently protected under rent control, would continue to be protected. It is ONLY when the tenant voluntarily leaves, or is evicted for just cause, that the unit is relieved of rent control. RENT CONTROL hurts tenants, owners and the city of San Francisco. For an in-depth case against rent control read “The Case for Ending Rent Control” by Peter Byrne in the SFWeekly. Here is a synopsis for Byrne’s argument: Some of the reasons rent control hurts the people it was intended to help (”the law of unintended consequences”): 1. Poor financial planning for the tenant. Example- Ms. Tenant rented an apartment out of college for $700/month. Although her income increased over the years, and she could have purchased a condo for herself, she didn’t 2. High, unaffordable rents: Rent control discourages tenants from moving, effectively removing these units from the market and the number of available rental properties. With low inventory and high demand, rents stay high. 3. Owners reluctant to negotiate on rental price: If an owner knows they will be severely limited to rent increases (the average allowable rent increase over the last 15 years has been 1.68%) they will hold out for a high rent even if it means several months of vacancy. 4. Incentive to reduce the inventory of rental property: Owners choosing to sell rental units as TIC’s because rents are not adequate to pay property expenses. Developers fearing rent control, reluctant to build rental properties, keeping inventory low while demand continues to grow. 5. Owners reluctant and/or unable to afford to keep rent control properties in good repair: The tenants live with thread bare carpets, chipped and pealing paint, broken cabinets. The exteriors of the properties are often dirty, dingy and in general poor repair. 6. Low income, elderly tenants severely disadvantaged: An owner with a vacant unit is going to favor high income young tenants who are likely to move in a couple years than lower income and/or older tenant, because it is Economists predict, and other decontrolled cities have proven, that if San Francisco decontrolled rental units, the price of formerly controlled units would rise, but to a level nowhere near as high as current rents. In effect, it would result in an overall rent reduction. The two propositions are complex and somewhat confusing. If you would like a three page comparison of Prop 98 - “California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act” and Prop 99 “Homeowners and Private Property Remember, if Prop 98 passes, no tenant will be displaced or have their rent raised in excess of the current rent control maindates. Decontrol takes effect ONLY after the tenant voluntarily leaves, or is evicted for just cause. ********************************* To be honest, I kind of forget sometimes that we have things to vote on in June. My mental bandwidth has pretty much been taken up by the current primaries and upcoming November general election. take up pretty up all of my mental bandwidth. Props 98/99 are important to consider, especially if you are a San Francisco landlord or TIC owner– |
|
|
|
The following is critical information for landlords and TIC owners. I came to me by email courtesy of Sharone Malone. It interprets (to some degree) the difference between Props 98 and 99, coming on the June ballot.
