Sample Our Newsletter

Pity the poor vacant apartment. Everybody seems to think they know what's best for it. On one hand, we have Michael Weinstein's so-called "Justice for Renters Act," a statewide ballot measure to repeal Costa-Hawkins and open the door to the ultimate goal of rent-control zealots: vacancy control. On the other hand, we have Prop. M, a San Francisco tax measure that penalizes property owners between $2,500 and $5,000 per vacant unit. Everybody thinks they know best, except one person—the property owner. Vacancy control limits an owner's ability to increase rent for new renters, even if the prior renter voluntarily vacates the apartment or was evicted for a "just cause" (e.g., failure to pay rent). With Costa-Hawkins, when a renter vacates a rent-controlled unit, the owner can re-rent it at market rate. Let's make sure it stays that way.

Vacancy provides rare opportunity for renovation
Rehabbing an occupied rental unit is extremely difficult. San Francisco apartments are often compact. Balancing repairs and upgrades without negatively impacting the overall space and disrupting the occupant(s) is a challenge. While renters can't stop paying rent, they can request a rent reduction if renovations affect their living condition, and may seek compensation if construction work negatively impacts them. A vacant apartment is just the opposite. Workers can leave their tools, drop cloths, and floor sanders onsite overnight and not have to haul them back and forth. If needed, electricity, gas, and water can be shut off, appliances can be disconnected, and no one is inconvenienced. This greatly reduces the time, and to some extend the cost, involved.

The downside
Of course, while this work is being done, no one's paying rent. You could be out many thousands of dollars during this dormant period. In the meantime, the city's economy and rental market may have fallen. The market-rate rent you hoped to obtain when re-renting the apartment might be less. Plus, all those improvements you made to the unit still need to be paid.

The biggest misconception
What many people fail to understand, and what some people with an agenda want others to believe—the claim that a vacant unit is exempt from rent control (and therein a motive to evict long-term tenants)—is FALSE. In fact, once a new tenant moves into a rent-controlled unit and signs the lease, the rent-control clock starts ticking and continues for the life of the tenancy.

Even Marx had this one right
It's not just most economists who think the government can do more harm than good when it intervenes in the economy (e.g., rent control), it was none other than Karl Marx of "The Communist Manifesto" fame who opined that "crackbrained meddling by the authorities [can] aggravate an existing crisis." That's certainly been true with California's housing crisis.

The paradox of good intentions
While these strict rent control-obsessed do-gooders see their efforts as stabilizing housing costs and protecting renters from displacement, in reality, they're perpetuating a cycle of past mistakes that interfere in the rental housing market. While attorneys fight the vacancy tax in court, I urge you to help defeat the "Justice for Renters Act" with contributions to the Californians for Affordable Housing Act PAC (see appeal on page 1 of the March 2024 SPOSFI News,) and, of course, voting NO NO NO at the ballot box this November. Also, and very importantly, urge all your friends and associates, even if they are renters, that Weinstein 3.0 is bad news for California and that they should vote NO. Let's hope that sanity prevails and that the "Justice for Renters Act" fails and the Vacancy Tax lawsuit succeeds.