This basically seals the deal that San Francisco is going to be a Big Tech town going forward; if you are a mid-size company or smaller, you need to pick another city or go remote (if you haven't likely done that already).https://twitter.com/MLNow/status/1214242370478170113 …
-
Show this thread
-
Big Tech is already fueling a lot of the leasing in the city, pushing other cos out. With this effective office space ban likely to pass and existing commercial real estate operators agreeing to it to enhance their pricing oligopoly, you get the idea.... https://product.costar.com/home/news/shared/1457689812 …pic.twitter.com/Rj0d6iuFeQ
3 replies 11 retweets 82 likesShow this thread -
Kim-Mai Cutler Retweeted Paul Roales
Yes. Political actors in SF ostensibly arguing for equity will just gentrify Oakland more. https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Why-downtown-Oakland-is-booming-14869616.php …https://twitter.com/PaulRoales/status/1214636083217981440 …
Kim-Mai Cutler added,
2 replies 13 retweets 106 likesShow this thread -
Kim-Mai Cutler Retweeted Renee DiResta
And it only cost them $400K.https://twitter.com/noUpside/status/1214390623484035073 …
Kim-Mai Cutler added,
Renee DiRestaVerified account @noUpsidePlease note the key sentence in this article about an upcoming SF housing ballot measure. $407k can buy housing policy. That’s it. Less than a seed round. This is what the proposition system enables, but only one side is playing the game... https://missionlocal.org/2020/01/proposition-e-barring-unforeseen-lunacy-will-pass-handily-but-then-what/ … pic.twitter.com/KZmZ00a5dmShow this thread4 replies 4 retweets 59 likesShow this thread -
Dilemma of the Bay Area city. 1) Say no to office growth = will be harder to keep up with deficits & $10B pension/OPEB liability + big companies that are more resourced and adept at tax evasion will crowd out everyone else + gentrify East Bay.https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-mayor-orders-budget-cuts-as-city-takes-on-14911585.php …
3 replies 9 retweets 77 likesShow this thread -
2) Say yes to office growth = gets disproportionately priced into residential real estate with little recapture from existing property owners to compensate for impacts because of Prop. 13.https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2016/01/san-francisco-home-values-zillow.html …
2 replies 4 retweets 67 likesShow this thread -
But this measure won't meaningfully add more funding for affordable housing. It will just ban office space in SF, and then shift the calculus of office space feasibility into other Bay Area cities.
8 replies 6 retweets 93 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Coupling office space growth to housing growth makes sense to me -- it prevents cities from capturing the "ice cream" benefits (tax revenue, restaurant spend) will externalizing the "vegetable" costs (building housing, NIMBY tears, etc). (1/X)
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
it's tied to affordable housing growth for which there is no real funding mechanism except for taxing new housing and occasionally doing a bond but only when it doesn't involve a real tax increase for property owners...
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler
put 1/X on this because couldn't find affordable vs overall into the tweet :-P
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.