Editor:

I quote President of the SF Board of Supervisors Aaron Peskin:

“We must also protect, strengthen and expand rent control. Rent control
is a lifeline. It stops unfair evictions and limits rent increases. It
helps those at risk of homelessness stay in their homes. And it makes
this city affordable to poets, artists, musicians, writers and dreamers.
To students and hotel workers. To immigrants and struggling families.
To teachers and Muni operators and to the people who work in the service
and tourism sectors that are so important in our city. And we have a
chance to expand rent control across California this November by voting
to eliminate Costa Hawkins. If it is successful, as mayor, I will
immediately expand rent control to the 40% of San Francisco tenants who
don’t benefit from it today because of Costa Hawkins. Because every
tenant deserves the same protection. And I will work to outlaw the
demolition of rent-controlled housing unless it is replaced with new
rent-controlled housing.”

Peskin proclaimed this at his inaugural mayoral campaign speech, which was delivered to a crowd of hundreds at Portsmouth Square on April 7.

Peskin’s candidacy is what may have spurred realtor John Lee to launch his attack on rent control in these pages. He conveniently leaves out a number of facts: Tenants are selected by the landlord, many of whom are not mom-and-pop operations but corporations with thousands of units. Landlords often neglect repairs because they are cheap, not because the tenant is not paying the currently extortionate market-rate rents  — rents that are also found in the majority of cities which do not have rent control. The landlord is relieved from the cost of cleaning the property (because empty properties do deteriorate), repainting the walls, etc. and gains a steady income. (If the apartment needs repainting, the landlord is unlikely to do it.) Tenants are also responsible for basic maintenance and will alert the property owner about leaks and other problems. An empty house tells no tales. Nor does it bring in revenue.

Unconscionably, the costs of renovations can also be passed through to tenants. Yet, tenants do not benefit from the appreciation gained when a building is sold. When a tenant enters into a contract, the landlord has set the rate. The security deposit is held interest free and, frequently, charges, fair or unfair, may be subtracted to consume part or all of it when they leave. Tenants who are leaving town will not be able to go to small claims court, and those staying may not have the time and energy. Because vacancy control does not exist, the landlord can charge whatever unbearable rate the market will bear.

Current rent levels are a disaster for San Francisco, because —to employ current terminology —businesses can not “thrive” here and couples are deprived of “joy” because the rents prohibit minimum-wage workers from living here. And they make it difficult for business.

In order for the city to prosper, we need rent control on all housing and commercial rent control as well. Unfortunately, greed will continue to rule the roost!

Harry S. Pariser