With Soaring Rents and a Vanishing Middle Class, San Francisco Becomes a City for the Rich

[marmar]

With Soaring Rents and a Vanishing Middle Class, San Francisco Becomes a City for the Rich

Tuesday, 15 December 2015 00:00
By Adam Hudson, Truthout | Report


In San Francisco's November election - in which Mayor Ed Lee was re-elected - housing was the number one issue. Two major progressive ballot measures related to housing were defeated: One would have regulated Airbnb by limiting the number of short-term vacation rentals, while the other would have put a moratorium on development in the city's Mission District.

Airbnb spent over $8 million to defeat the proposition that would have regulated it. Even though the development moratorium lost, progressives promise to continue fighting against "market-rate" housing development in the Mission and other neighborhoods, the issue being that few people in San Francisco can afford "market-rate" housing, except those who are rich.

In addition to tenants themselves, nonprofit organizations that assist tenants are also feeling the pain of gentrification. Two San Francisco nonprofits that help tenants avoid eviction - Eviction Defense Collaborative and Tenants Together - are, ironically, getting kicked out of their offices to make room for WeWork, an office-space provider company.

What's happening in San Francisco is not just a story about one city; it's a story of what is happening to urban areas around the globe. As the days go by, San Francisco is solidifying itself as a city for the wealthy, putting it on par with wealth havens like New York City, London and Singapore, where long-time residents have been pushed out and replaced by corporations and the super-rich.

Super High Rents

The median rent for a one-bedroom apartment in San Francisco is $3,500 per month, according to real estate website Zumper's latest monthly report for November. In October, median rent for a one-bedroom was $3,670 per month, making this the first rent decrease to occur in a while - a decrease of 4.6 percent. However, San Francisco monthly rents remain astronomically high compared to other cities like Chicago and Washington, DC, which are $1,980 and $2,160, respectively. ...............(more)

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34031-with-soaring-rents-and-a-vanishing-middle-class-san-francisco-becomes-a-city-for-the-rich

[upaloopa]

1. I am going to San Francisco over the holidays.

I love it there but I could never afford to live there.

We ride the cable cars a lot when we are there and always have to show our day pass that we get.

People who live along the rails just jump on and no questions asked.

They ride so often the operators know who they are and that they buy monthly passes.

That's one of the bennies you get by being able to afford an apartment in town.

[KamaAina]

3. The Fast Pass is the only way to go if you ride the cable cars regularly.

They sock tourists like us $6 a pop! And they still don't have enough $$ to make Muni work.

As it happens, I, too, will be in The City between Xmas and New Year's.

[upaloopa]

6. Well if we bump into each other we will never

know it.

[KamaAina]

7. There is the possibility of a DU meetup

depending on what Hell Hath No Fury and arcane1 are doing around then.

The traditional site is Tommy's Joynt, Van Ness at Geary, "home of the buffalo stew".

[upaloopa]

14. Do they talk about Hillary and Bernie?

Might not be much fun if so.

[KamaAina]

15. Hmmm. The three of us are Bernie folks

but the conversations tend to revolve around Repulsican tomfoolery.

[Luminous Animal]

32. Really? I wish I could join but I don't eat meat. I regularly go to restaurants that

serve meat but Tommy's Joynt is just way too much for me.

[KamaAina]

36. Actually, Hell Hath No Fury is veggie as well.

She grabbed something from a place right across Van Ness and brought it in.

[still_one]

11. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend beach blanket babylon, though tickets might be hard to

get

[brooklynite]

17. Correction - SF Muni has a policy of allowing passengers with passes to board without inspection...

...they are subject to periodic inspection.

A monthly pass is only $70.

[upaloopa]

18. Well I am not a regular so thanks for the info

[Luminous Animal]

29. You probably know this but Muni has 1-7 day visitor passes.

https://www.sfmta.com/getting-around/transit/fares-passes/visitor-day-passes

You might want to consider visiting where I work. It is the last place in existence in the world. Plus, you are in part of the Presidio that is gorgeous.

[upaloopa]

33. I think we are staying near there

We are staying at the Pier 2620 motel

[Luminous Animal]

30. You probably know this but Muni has 1-7 day visitor passes.

https://www.sfmta.com/getting-around/transit/fares-passes/visitor-day-passes

You might want to consider visiting where I work. It is the last place in existence in the world. Plus, you are in part of the Presidio that is gorgeous.

[Prism]

2. I'd quibble a bit here

The Air BnB ballot measure was insanely restrictive. Pretty much everyone was against it. Gavin Newsome was running ads bitching about it. So, I don't know that I want to call it "a progressive measure". It would've ended in neighbors suing each other. It was stupidly written.

That said.

Yes, this city is crazy, crazy, crazy. I've posted about this many times before, but the amounts my friends are paying in the city vs. what I'm paying just outside of Berkeley is insane. They are, more or less, throwing down 6x the money I am.

Berkeley and Oakland are technifying (gentrifying/tech). Section 8 is vanishing. Oh, the landlords will observe the rules, barely, and hey, what does that term mean, affordable? Mix in a world class university full of students with money, it's not going to get any better.

That said. I'm a working/middle class DINC and exist just fine here. It's not the apocalypse. Of course, I don't live in the Mission. That's actually an apocalypse. They're just fucking poor minorities because they can. White guys gotta soccer somewhere!

Maupin's Tales of the City is dead. I feel like people expect that of here. Newp. We're done. We're now a techopolis, and god help whoever's poor and in our way.

[still_one]

4. Housing prices are though the roof also. In Santa Clara county it isn't that much better. In

Cupertino off Wolfe Road where the new Apple campus is being built, there are two bedrooms apartments across from Valco going for 4500/month.

New folks coming into the rental or housing market in Northern or Southern California can be paying 50% of their salary for rent. They can commute from Oakland where it is somewhat better, but prices are slowly moving up their also. I know some folks commuting from Stockton, which is a 90 minute drive one-way.

[Johonny]

40. I haven't live there in 13 years

But people driving in from Stockton or further away was the norm.

[still_one]

41. I didn't come that way so I don't know, but one thing I do know, traffic

sucks, and the 580 corridor from Stockton to SF is a real drag

[KamaAina]

5. It's like a Summer of Love for the one-percenters

[still_one]

8. That isn't exactly true. A lot of people have lived here for decades, and they are not the 1%. The

problem is foreign investment and speculation against the locals. Somehow that need to be restricted. If you have a local bidding on a house, and a foreign investment comes in willing to pay cash, at a high inflated price, the local loses out.

They really have to limit foreign investment in the real estate market in the U.S.

A lot of rents have skyrocketed because of the Googles, high tech, and financial companies. However, a lot of people do not work for those companies, and even for those that do, they are still paying 50% plus of their salary for housing. It is really messed up for those coming into the market new in California.

While higher interest rates normally would decrease R.E. prices, due to foreign investment, who pay cash, I don't think higher interest rates will bring it down significantly.

They have rent control in SF, but landlords are finding ways around that also.

[KamaAina]

9. The ones flooding in are primarily wealthy techies

Therein lies the problem.

[KamaAina]

10. "They have rent control in SF, but landlords are finding ways around that also."

That would be the Ellis Act, a state law tat allows landlords to go out of the rental property business by evicting ("Ellising out&quot any or all of their tenants. A building so emptied is then flipped, likely to the speculators you mentioned.

[still_one]

12. I see you are from where I am, so you know exactly what is happening. Not great in Santa Clara

either

[KamaAina]

13. Nope, and we have very few amenities compared to SF

and most of what we do have is not transit-accessible.

[still_one]

16. That is one nice thing about SF, their mass transit. San Jose has tried with the light rail, but it

doesn't cover enough places.

san mateo wouldn't allow bart through, and after decades they are now extending the line from Fremont to San Jose, but as usual, it is too little too late I am afraid

[KamaAina]

26. And my light rail line runs every half-hour middays and weekends

whether I need one or not.

[Prism]

20. My building is owned by Chinese nationals

I basically do what I can to make sure no one knows I'm there. Faucet breaks? Fixed it. Shower clogs? Rigged up the plumbing.

I know this is an investment for them, and I know they weigh costs vs. rent. So I basically do everything possible so they do not know I actually live here.

[still_one]

21. They are supposed to be responsible for such repairs, but I understand about keeping a low profile

[Prism]

22. In theory, they're responsible for tons of shit

But I manage what I can, because my rent is low, and I don't want to give them an excuse to notice me.

I'm still wondering who's problem the linoleum is. That is where I may draw the line.

[Xithras]

23. My daughter is moving to SF in February.

She's transferring to SFSU and will live in a two bedroom apartment with three other people, making it a bit more affordable. Not everyone in SF is a 1%er.

I still have many friends who live in the city, and none of them are 1%ers either. It's still entirely possible to live in the Outer Sunset, Richmond, or Excelsior areas on a "normal" middle class income. They aren't the most glamorous parts of the city, and they don't have the postcard views or have trendy restaraunts on each corner like other areas of SF, but they aren't slums and are still "in the City". I just visited a friend last weekend who lives off Noriega only a few blocks from the beach and a short walk from GG park. He pays right around $2000 a month for a fairly large (by SF standards) 3 bedroom walkup. If you lean waaaay out his bedroom window and look left, it's even got an ocean view!

[Throd]

24. Sunset is the only place I'd want to live in 'Frisco.

It is less chaotic and one can always take the Judah Street trolley to get to the more "exciting" parts of town.

[KamaAina]

25. a) It's a streetcar. b) Frisco is the Dallas suburb where MLS' FC Dallas plays.

[Throd]

27. I call it 'Frisco every chance I get.

Because I'm from Sac and I know it bugs the shit out of them.

[KamaAina]

28. Why doesn't Stockton have an NBA team?

Because then Sac would want one, too.

[brooklynite]

19. As an Urban Planner, I have an answer that you won't like....

Cities changes. Desirable cities grow in population. Increased population puts upward pressure on rentals and sales. The Tenderloin was "skid row" for decades because nobody wanted to go there. Now they do.

Unless the City is going to spend massive amounts on public housing, people who can afford more are going to have the edge in the real estate market.

[Gormy Cuss]

39. As an urban planner you must know that inclusionary zoning, construction, financing, and tax

incentives are tools used successfully by municipalities to preserve and expand affordable housing options.

The biggest problem in SF is that too much of the city is still low density housing because of decades of opposition to higher density development. That attitude is starting to change as formerly working waterfront areas are being transformed into high density multi-use areas.
As is often the case though, the spillover effect into adjacent low and moderate income neighborhoods is causing massive displacement, so much so that businesses in the city are struggling to find and retain workers for low wage jobs. Moving to where rents are more affordable here is a daunting as it is in NY metro: commute times and costs become prohibitive and workers who can, find employment closer to home.

[brooklynite]

43. Yes they do...but not at a scale to provide affordable housing for everyone who needs it

Add to which, it is virtually impossible to "protect" working class neighborhoods if their location and characteristics are desirable. In the Lower East Side (working class Jewish) north of the Manhattan Bridge, land became available and a 71-story apartment tower is going in. Why, because waterfront location and killer views will attract top dollar. That in turn to influence area shopping, which will influence rents and redevelopment, etc.

[Gormy Cuss]

45. There's a vast gulf between providing for everyone and just shrugging off all change as good

or natural to the vibrancy of a city. There's also a difference between "protecting" a specific geography and protecting affordability.

[CreekDog]

46. your reasoning is simplistic

You say you are a college professor, is it in Urban Planning or something else? You oversimplification in what is apparently your field seems a bit odd.

[brooklynite]

47. I teach Transportation and Land Use to grad students at NYU...

..and I'm not trying to offer a treatise, I'm laying out some basic points to a general audience. Cities are dynamic. You can complain about changes as much as you want but there isn't much you can do, policy-wise, to stop it. I live in an upper-class neighborhood in NYC that was a down at the heels working class neighborhood 75 years ago and was a middle class neighborhood 50 years before that. Affordable housing can be encouraged, and it can be built by the municipality, but neither strategy is going to address a significant share of the needs of lower income residents. and no amount of affordable housing is going to stop gentrification is going to save a working class neighborhood if there's enough demand for housing stock from people who can pay more (see: Harlem).

[CreekDog]

49. do you have a rent controlled apartment?

[AtomicKitten]

31. Yep. I'm feeling the pain every month.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

34. I'm not sure it's the super rich, it's mostly the young and naive

Who are making ridiculous sacrifices to pay these rents while they put in 80-100 hour weeks at bullshit companies that won't see the end of the decade.

The rich aren't going to tolerate the urban savages one will find outside that $3500 apartment.

[melman]

35. Happening in Austin, Seattle, NYC

Everywhere good, basically. It sucks.

[Taitertots]

37. Welcome to American capitalism

Everything that is desirable is only available to the rich.

[Yavin4]

38. The REAL problem is the rest of the USA

Humans want to live in cities. They don't want to live in suburbs and sit in cars for 2-3 hours a day. They want to live in close proximity to each other. That's in our DNA.

In the U.S., there are only a hand full of locations that offer that style of living. NY, Boston, SF, Chicago, Portland, Seattle, DC, and a few other places, and guess what, THEY ARE THE MOST EXPENSIVE PLACES TO LIVE.

We could alleviate the crisis by making the REST of the country more desirable. If more areas had vibrant urban areas and better public transportation, and more close proximity living, then people would live in those areas and prices overall would come down.

[alarimer]

44. Lots of places are affordable because no one wants to move there.

I've lived in lots of places I could easily afford, but were awful in so many ways (lack of culture, right-wing assholes abounding, nothing fun to do, small town, etc). So I moved north, to someplace I could not actually afford if I weren't living with someone. We can probably afford a house here with our two salaries, but I could never do that on my own.

But I can't ever see Corpus Christi, say, being a good place to live for folks like me, people who like non-mainstream culture. it is a very "middling" sort of place and too far from anyplace else that might have it (like San Antonio or Austin, which are both pretty good places to live). I lived there for 15 years and it is kind of a dump. Except for the proximity to the beach, it has nothing going for it. The plus side is that people can now afford to live near the beach. If it became trendy, that would end in a hurry.

[LittleBlue]

42. It's a trade-off. Comes with the territory of being the technology capital of the world

Sad, but gentrification has been going on for hundreds of years. There's nothing to be done about it because it's inevitable.

[AZ Progressive]

48. The biggest reason for this is because the suburban trend has faded and big cities are now popular..

again.

Big cities emptied during the white flight - suburban era during the latter half of the 20th century, and since at least the beginning of the millennium, big cities and especially urban life have become popular again to live in. Millennials are also driving this trend, preferring to live in big cities rather than suburbs. Suburbs seem to have reached their peak during the baby boomer wave, but Millenials are not following their parents and thus demand is higher than ever for living in big cities. This is intensified in San Francisco with the big money of Silicon Valley coming in, because many Millennial techies would rather live in San Francisco than Silicon Valley, and many of the newest tech startups are being established in San Francisco. These techies in San Francisco have the ability to pay those astronomical rents.