In light of the YIMBYs this week tipping their hand in attempting to no-platform tenants of color at risk of displacement due to SB827, I recommend the @antievictionmap's excellent report, "The Racial Contours of YIMBY/NIMBY Bay Area Gentrification" https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4sw2g485 …
Because all Tim looked at is whether the Assessor’s Office primary address for the homeowner is the unit in question (see https://48hills.org/2014/09/investigation-new-condos-arent-owned-san-francisco-residents/#comment-1908861192 …). For *any* rental property (owned by anyone, city or otherwise) that will say “absentee”.
-
-
See the first comment for an example of a renter. It’d be interesting to see real numbers on the number of non-resident *non-rental* properties in these buildings. I’d guess the vacancy rate would be higher than SF overall but lower than e.g. Vancouver, where speculation is worse
-
I’d also like that data. The commenter’s argument is valid. I didn’t mean to present the data as the end all be all, just as an offhand illustration of how increasing luxury supply doesn’t increase available units in a significant way
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.
