8 ms·
I think you're confusing the Ellis Act with the SF Rent Ordinance, which establishes rent control and other things. The Ellis Act is generally considered to be
by dnr 13y ago
I think you're confusing the Ellis Act with the SF Rent Ordinance, which establishes rent control and other things. The Ellis Act is generally considered to be hostile to tenants and friendly to landlords (as it sets up a sort of loophole to evict rent-controlled tenants).
- varelse 13y agoViewed as hostile to tenants by tenants I expect. It's a pretty expensive loophole that I've personally seen bring small landlords to economic ruin. After all, heaven forbid we allow property owners to have control over their own property at any time.
- dnr 13y agoThat doesn't make much sense to me: doing an Ellis eviction is a voluntary act by a landlord. If it would bring them to ruin, why would they initiate it? (I hope your second paragraph wasn't directed at me. I haven't given any indication of my opinions on the laws in question.)
- varelse 13y agoIn the case of my friend, because she could no longer afford to subsidize the rent of the tenant and they've decided that if they have to pay the mortgage and property taxes of the unit, they might as well live in it (or in the case of the friend, she wanted to move her parents into the unit as opposed to into assisted living). But even if she just wanted to personally sunbathe in each room of the unit, WTH should such a landlord have to pay a cent towards the relocation expenses of the soon to be ex-tenant? I'm a pretty liberal guy in most ways, but this is utter BS entitlement IMO.