Rent Control - Part 14 Just Said NO

B'game has spoken - rather shouted - NO to rent control.  Here is the Shape the Future results from tonight's election which we have followed from the start and you can read about here:

CITY OF BURLINGAME MEASURE R (MAJORITY APPROVAL REQUIRED)

Complete Precincts: 13 of 13

YES 2,988             32.56%

NO 6,188              67.44%

That is a 70/30 butt kicking.  San Mateo's Measure Q was 10% closer but still a 60/40 whooping.  Q had slightly less obnoxious regulation but still not modest enough to pass.  The losers will whine about the money raised in opposition, but when the results are this lopsided you have to look in the mirror and ask "what did we do wrong?"  Answer:  "We wrote a horrible ordinance that would eventually hurt the people we thought we were helping and would hurt pretty much everyone else in town as well".

Comments

[J. Mir]

Well yes, a small ray of sunshine in the gloom that is the rest of this night.

[[email protected]]

Trump's win was a surprise.
I believe it would be insincere to state that Rent Control had any chance of passing.
I understand the No Rent Control lobby having to lie, and exaggerate facts/figures.
However, it just waters down the entire political process when it happens.
Nobody can trust what another says.
When it is all said and done, forgive and forget.
That is Politics Folks.

[Mike]

With all the education that went on about the actual language in the proposed ordinance, which is the governing document, your statement about the lobby is mistaken. Though perhaps you believe that ordinance was a good thing. If so, like you say That is Politics Folks.

[Charlene]

R was a disasteR from the get go. The No on R people were not the ones telling the lies. I just cannot believe there are even as many gullible people in San Mateo and Burlingame as voted for Q and R.

[Mike]

Remember, the BARP folks touted getting 3400 or so signatories for the initiative and those that voted yes were 2988....that some something in and of itself.

[Bruce Dickinson]

Well guys, what is there really more to say? As Bruce Dickinson predicted a while back, Measure R was swiftly and decisively defeated! Considering the high rental population in Burlingame, a 68%/32% split is what I like to call a classic dose of Whoop-&ss!

Basically, the pro-R faction did everything wrong from the start that I said would not only doom their campaign, but would render any sort of rent control measure DOA for probably 20-30 years. Sorry folks, but what "works" in SF, Berkeley, Santa Cruz, Santa Monica and other rent-controlled seedy element cities doesn't work in Burlingame because we know better and we know what we don't want to become! Burlingame has a very strong sense of "self" and "character" that will outlast this and other bad ideas (example given: the Grand Boulevard Plan).

Not to mention the fact that many of the older apartments in Burlingame are some of the cheapest on the Peninsula, from a relative point of view, so exactly whom would a measure help other than a few select incumbents is the fatal mistake being made. Populism, which has swept up the nation, by its very nature, means the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Only benefiting a select few goes against the current zeitgeist of what we are seeing all over this country!

If you want rent control, go move to another city with rent control. Oh wait, those apartments are impossible to rent as those currently under rent control protection never move out! Ya know what I mean?

[[email protected]]

Dear Mr. Dickenson,
Please tell us what you believe a fair rent should be for a one bedroom apartment in Downtown Burlingame should cost?
How about a one bedroom apartment on Rollins Road?
How about a home rental on Balboa& Adeline?
My point is that the people who have "Nothing to Loose" are making rules for people who want to get a start.
So Mr. Dickinson, are you able to show us your cards?
I really am looking forward to see what a representative of the 1% deems fair.
I bet dollars to donuts Mr. Dickinson can not/will not, answer the question.
Mr. Dickenson may get kicked out of the Burlingame Golf Club for sharing with the Proletariat.

[Bruce Dickinson]

Holly-baby, c'mon baby, the answer for a fair rent for all the situations describe is what the market will bear. If you recall, I took quite a bit of time to answer a similar question you had posed Bruce Dickinson a while back in September.

http://www.burlingamevoice.com/2016/09/rent-control-part-8-outnumbered-101.html#comments

Here is the response from that posting (9/24/2017) and I stand by my answer:

"Holly-baby, I'll entertain your question for a brief moment, as Bruce Dickinson does appreciate my fans and I believe you deserve an answer. I don't know how much it takes to live in Burlingame and it's probably a lot. I didn't know how much it took to live in the Bronx growing up as a child, but I gotta tell ya, my parents struggled and there was no way we could live in Manhattan as the Bronx was barely affordable. The bottom line is, my parents somehow made it work by living in a lower cost area of NYC. Once I moved to Southern California to start my legendary career producing dynamite records, I didn't buy a house in Topanga. I rented a West Hollywood apartment that was a step up from a roach motel, because that's all I could afford at the time.

We have freedom of movement and there are lower cost options on the Peninsula and in other parts of the State/country.

Having been on the other side of the affordability line, if you will, both as a child and in starting my career, I get the frustration. But at the same time, things like rent control only benefit long-time incumbents in older properties where owners OK with not tearing them down, at the expense of everyone else. What do you think will happen if there is rent control? The same thing that has happened in every single city where it was enacted: Builders will start tearing down old apartments and building condos, townhomes or houses. New tenants that move into existing rental properties will be paying much more than those who got in at the right time. House prices will go even higher and crowd out any sort of single family home rental market. The reasons for not having rent control are not about elitist arguments, they're about being fair to everyone, new tenants, old tenants, young families, immigrants just coming to this country. In effect, the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

If Bruce Dickinson were really concerned about economic self-interest I would vote for rent control, as that makes newer rentals more expensive, crowds out single family rentals, thus more people buy houses, resulting in rising owned housing values, and higher incentives to tear down apartment buildings and build new condos/houses. In a few decades, what will be left is a small fraction of long-time renters that get cheap rent at the expense of everyone else. Doesn't sound fair to me and is anti-populist, but what do I know, I'm just a caveman legendary record producer?!!

Thanks for soliciting my opinion, but as Joe and several others have stated many many times, rent control benefits only one group of people, that will get smaller and smaller as the years pass."

[[email protected]]

Thank you Mr. Dickenson.
I appreciate your respectful and thorough response.

[Jennifer]

'Just happened to be on Delaware in S.M. this afternoon, and there is so much new development happening there near 92, as well as several smaller infill projects further north, that we'll virtually have a new city before long.

How "affordable" are these, I wonder. Something tells me that all this building will barely make a dent in the demand. I cannot understand the mantra of "let's build more" because the sheer number of units needed to make any noticeable drop in prices would make the SF Peninsula completely undesirable (and we're headed that way)-- little to no public transportation, particularly in the east-west direction.

And these projects may call themselves "green", but there is no green around them, bleak, "Stack and pack" to the max. 'Wondering about the water demand, as well as the school situation.

[fred]

East-west direction public transportation? Is that for the mountain lions or the leopard sharks because the only commuting east-west is to the bay or the green-belt.

Look what's back in the spotlight: http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/lnews/2016-11-14/highway-101-ramps-plan-back-into-gear/1776425171317.html

The construction going on at the Poplar interchange right now is ridiculous.

[Joe]

Always quick on the trigger, Fred. Here is a new thread for this discussion:

http://www.burlingamevoice.com/2016/11/poplar-ave-saga-continues.html#comments

Let's leave this thread for Rent Control aftermath, please.

[Joe]

We received an email from Zumper, an apartment rental platform back in March. It says

"We have just published our first ever Metro Report for the SF Bay Area and I thought you would be interested in taking a look. The report covers 28 cities in the metro area to highlight the most/least expensive cities and cities with the fastest growing rents. We analyzed over 11,000 active listings last month.

Some Highlights
-Burlingame ranked as the 8th most expensive city to rent, with one bedroom units priced at a median of $2,350.

-Since this time last year, Burlingame rents fell 15%."

---------------
I don't know Zumper, but I also have no reason to doubt the accuracy. Any ideas on why rents are dropping? Could it be because the Rent Controllers actually caused rents to rise unnaturally?

[Joe]

The team at Zumper has checked back in with this month's figures. Rents appear to be dropping in B'game as they appear to be dropping elsewhere in the Bay Area:

Some Highlights
-Burlingame ranked as the 10th most expensive city to rent.
-The price of one bedroom units fell 2.1% to a median of $2,300, while two bedrooms dropped 4% to $3,100.

A full discussion can be found on our post: https://www.zumper.com/blog/2017/04/sf-bay-area-metro-report-april-2017/

--------------------

Gee if we had "rent control" would renters be paying more than a market rate right now???

[Bruce Dickinson]

Joe, in a word, YES!

This Trumped-up trickle down economics may have some legs for a couple of years at most, but Bruce Dickinson is seeing eerily similar parallels to the dot.com bubble in 2000-2001.

The longer and higher things rise, the harder they will fall. You can take that advice right to the bank!

[Joe]

I've got my deposit slip in hand. More Cowbell.

[resident]

Has anyone noticed the socialist leeches beating up on some poor woman on Nextdoor?

[Joe]

We can put this in the "I'm confused but I am going to write an angry letter anyway" file from today's Daily Journal:

Editor,

I have to agree with the letter “Burlingame City Council” by Steve Gouveia (in the Sept. 26 edition of the Daily Journal). It’s time for new councilmembers to be elected. We need to get rid of those councilmembers who think that renters should have to leave Burlingame after two years, moving on like nomads in the desert.

This does not promote “small-town charm.” Small-town charm is the friendship of neighbors helping each other, children growing up together and becoming lifelong friends, despite whether their parents own or rent their homes. We are fortunate to own our home because my husband’s parents bought it in 1922. Our youngest son met his best friend in kindergarten at McKinley Elementary School. His parents rented their home. The boys are now in their early 50s and are still best friends, even though our son’s friend has now moved out of state. He is always welcome to our home or to our celebrations when he is in town.

Burlingame should not be a place where only the wealthy can afford to live. It should be a place where all are welcomed, even those who are in service industries, whether they are teachers, cashiers in our stores or waiters in our restaurants. There should be affordable housing for them. That is small-town charm.

Charlene Schmitz

Burlingame
------------------

Dear Ms. Schmitz, the City Council put the rent control measure on the ballot just like the rent controllers wanted. They didn't have to, but they did. Then it got it's butt kicked at the polls by 35 POINTS!! How this could be the Council's fault is confused thinking. You apparently don't understand real "small town charm" where egregious laws do not get passed to take advantage of one's neighbors.

[resident]

There must be three strong socialist candidates on the ballot to replace the three big bad wolf councilers we have now.....what? wait...there ain't any free-love socialists running for council? How can that be when they are so right and so powerful?