“If you ever rent to someone in San Francisco,” he replied, “you can never raise their rent more than about 2 percent per year after that. You’re locked it at w

“If you ever rent to someone in San Francisco,” he replied, “you can never raise their rent more than about 2 percent per year after that. You’re locked it at whatever rate you start with.” A perverse incentive system for landlords locked in by governmental rent stabilization strategy? Perhaps a during the great reset which could dramatically shift the out of whack supply-demand curves due to work from home, which allows Twitter or FB workers freedom from being tethered to the physical offices and certain neighborhoods would allow a freer market wherein lower income workers could contribute to a vibrant streetscale of shops and restaurants to serve customers all along the economic stratum. Behold better neighborhoods and communities by not locking out workers and families who contribute to the base resource needs of say the Tenderloin by allowing them a vested property interest in those communities. Sounds like a reasonable strategy to me and leads to Lee’s government interference and picking winners and losers based on solely economic factors such as maximizing rent.