Board Decision Today Could Open Loophole for Condo Conversions

Ahhh... BeyondChron is at it again! This time they're claiming that unless the 'Supes disallow a fire damaged building to be considered for 'new construction' status and hence 'condo' status, that they'll be inviting a spate of arsons around the city.

"In a case with potentially far-reaching implications for the city's efforts to preserve rent controlled housing, the Board of Supervisors will decide today whether to approve the conversion of a fire damaged 30-unit apartment building to condominiums. The building, 901 Bush, suffered a serious but not catastrophic fire ten years ago, and ever since the blaze the tenants have been fighting to move back into their former homes. After the property remained for sale for years, it was sold to a builder who wants his renovation of the property to be deemed ‘new construction,’ thus enabling him to convert the former rent-controlled units into condos. Approval of condos would deny 901 Bush’s displaced tenants the right to return, and could create a dangerous incentive for landlords to use fires for condominium conversions otherwise prohibited under city law. "

"The Board of Supervisors will decide tomorrow whether or not to allow the exemption. If they choose to, San Francisco would lose forever a chunk of rent-controlled units, and a group of long-time residents would lose their former homes. Perhaps more troubling, the exemption could provide an incentive for building owners to commit arson to force out tenants under rent control. While this sounds like an unlikely prospect, according to long-time tenant activists, it’s happened before."

That's obviously quite telling about how damaging rent control has been in San Francisco when activists are willing to suggest that someone would commit a felony to acheive the same goal that they would be able to acheive in every other city in the country that is not subject to rent control.

And of course it's none other than Ted Gullicksen who is feeding these ideas to the "media" (intentionally in quotes here). "There’s been a number of arson-for-profit scams involving landlords potentially burning down buildings in order to reap benefits of getting tenants out and getting higher rent,” said Ted Gullicksen of the Tenants’ Union. “That’s why under rent control there’s a law to allow tenants back in - to lessen the motivation to do something like that. In the worst-case scenario, we could be facing a new epidemic of arson for profit, which inevitably costs tenant’s lives.”

Isn't the first thing they teach you in journalism school the concept of using facts to back up theories? Shouldn't Teddy-boy give us even ONE concrete piece of evidence that this has ever happened in San Francisco? That vacant building on Shotwell that fell victim to the propane fires yesterday might also be rebuilt as CONDOS now. OH MY! There must have been an evil landlord behind those explosions! He was probably maquerading as a Hertz employee, toiling away for years just waiting for his chance to burn down his building and rebuild it as condos...

More housing = lower demand = less pressure on existing buildings = fewer tenant evictions = fewer ARSONS! Now shut the hell up, Ted, and find ways to build more housing, rather than making sure you always have a job by keeping inventory low!