Sunday, February 1, 2009

One-time Condo Conversion Opportunity?

A sensible idea was floated today via the mayor's office and published in the Chronicle. "The goal is to generate more revenue for the cash-strapped city and to create building-industry jobs, because condo conversions generally require some construction work to bring buildings up to code. "

There are upwards of 2,000 units occupied by owners who would like to convert their units to condo status. Given the city's limit of 200 conversions (units) per year, the wait is getting longer and longer.
Allowing these folks to complete their conversion without waiting for their number to come up in the lottery could have some additional benefits.
  • It gets owners out of the limbo world of TIC percentage ownership with shared mortgages.
  • It removes an unfair, arbitrary and convoluted lottery process that is currently used to determine who gets to condo convert (at least on a one-time basis).
  • It doesn't displace any renters (these folks are, by definition, owner occupants).
  • There will be downstream benefits to the city in terms of transfer and property taxes since it will make buying and selling these units easier.

Predictably, there will be knee-jerk opposition (read the comments following the Chronicle article, if you can bear it) but the only real argument being advanced is that this will create a precedent that will encourage future unfair Ellis Act evictions of tenants in other rental properties in order to convert to TICs and, eventually, condos. This seems highly unlikely given the very stringent rules that restrict or prohibit condo conversion altogether in buildings with certain eviction histories.

The truth (via the City's own Rent Board statistics) is that Ellis Act and owner move-in evictions have remained relatively flat for the last four years. Total evicitions are up in the last year but that's because there are more people not paying their rent or committing a "nuisance", both of which the City classifies as "just cause" evictions.

No comments:

Post a Comment