Here in Part 4 of what promises to be a very full category, I want to relate a real live conversation I just had with a Burlingame senior citizen. She is well into her '80s and has lived in Burlingame nearly all of her life.
The rent controllers are fond of relaying sad stories about the effect of rising rents on people so I thought I would do the same but from the other perspective.
My conversation partner is a widow. She and her husband owned a small business it town and lived in their Burlingame home for decades. As she relates it, the house was a major part of their retirement fund and hopefully the main asset they would leave to their children.
She has now moved into a senior living center in town and rented out the family home. So rent comes in one side and goes out the other. Slightly less is coming in than going out but she has no plans to raise the rent since it seems fair enough to her. When she read parts of the ordinance she was appalled. Not only is it confusing (there were plenty of lawyers involved in writing it) but some parts are downright scary to an elderly homeowner. Does she load the full burden of compliance on her family, some of who have moved to another state? Will the property manager be able to handle this? What if the tenants start to act up?
That last question rang in my head when I read a letter in yesterday's Daily Journal found here
I am deeply concerned that voters do not have the necessary information to make an informed decision about Measure Q in San Mateo and Measure R in Burlingame this November. I am a tenant and a property manager in San Mateo County, so I believe I have a balanced view.
I am most concerned about the just cause eviction clause (ed: see 20.04.060 here) in these measures, because if I did not know better, I would vote for it: landlords must have a good reason to evict tenants, sounds fair. Unfortunately, this is not how it works in practice. After managing property in San Francisco for several years, I have enough firsthand experience to know that the consequences of just cause eviction can be devastating.
Most tenants, like most rental property owners, are good people. But occasionally, you get a bad tenant. Someone who is extremely loud or drives recklessly or sublets to strangers, or even engages in violent or threatening behavior. Just cause eviction puts these tenants in a position of real power, because the legal process to remove them is laborious and expensive. It is NOT as simple as serving a notice — I’ve been through it. Many property owners end up stuck, watching helplessly as the property and, most of all, the neighbors, suffer.
I do not think tenants should be evicted for no reason. But just cause eviction is a terrible policy. And voters have a right to know.
Heather Sirk
Redwood City
On an earlier thread someone stated that "rent control is for corporations"; meaning it is to control them. That is just plain wrong. This ordinance would force a number of behavior changes by landlords big and small and very few of them will be to the benefit of renters. In the meantime, it's scary to some seniors.
Recent Comments