Senator Mark Leno has decided not to pursue his proposed bill to curb speculative Ellis Act evictions in San Francisco.

Drafted “to ensure that real estate speculators in San Francisco do not buy rent-controlled property and empty it of long-term tenants,” Senate Bill 1439 was tentatively passed by the State Senate last month but then rejected by the State Assembly’s Housing and Community Development Committee last week.

As plugged-in people know, a similar bill which was proposed back in 2007 never emerged from the Senate Floor.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by gribble

    Good. Some sort of sanity, even if it was not what Leno wanted.

  2. Posted by AlfieJr

    so once again we have the best government the real estate pigs can buy.

    • Posted by san FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

      When you come home, look around you and ask yourself how and by who those walls were built. Probably “real estate pigs”. Some people create, others consume and find things too expensive.

      • Posted by Serge

        Exactly. People often complain about those “evil developers” and “greedy real estate” people, but forget that those are the people that built their homes and their neighborhoods.

        • Posted by Futurist

          Yes. Agree.

        • Posted by san FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

          Yes, and there’s a risk involved. All deals I have made were done at 40 to 60% with my own hard earned money. Some people do less, but I put peace of mind before leverage.

      • Posted by Snobby McGoogle

        Real estate developers are gods, dammit… ye shall grovel before them in humility or face their wrath on Socketsite!

      • Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

        Self-aggrandizing much? I don’t think AlfieJr is referring to people who actually take the time to invest in building a new building as in the category “real estate pigs”.

        Now, those who come to S.F. in order to to position themselves to take advantage of growth that’s already underway, buy an existing older building, empty it of tenants in order to flip it, or illegally convert the units in older existing buildings to de facto hotel rooms by listing them on AirBnB and the like, those people are in the category “real estate pigs”.

        They aren’t contributing anything, they aren’t “creating” anything, they’re just parasites, like a

        You should ask yourself which group you and people like you are really in before you pat yourself on the back.

        • Posted by san FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

          Brahma, you should join the Noe Street Hypocrite whiner and move to Palm Desert.

          How can you call people “parasites” when your biggest accomplishment in real estate was probably to get approved for a lease. People who acted to curb this so-called “parasitism” in 1917 ended up bunking up 6 per bedroom 50 years later due to a dire lack of construction where housing was needed.

          I have built and renovated. I have always left a property in a better shape than when I found it. I also have profited from these actions and from right timing and risk taking.

          This is a free country and you can’t always attack others for your own frustrations. Now Palm Desert is cheap but warm. Say high to the Noe Street “victim” for me.

          • Posted by DRH

            What was the final amount extorted by that fine citizen of Desert Hot Springs?

          • Posted by san FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

            Oops, I mixed my transplant desert cities. No idea what that amount was but whatever the amount this is a painful slap in the face of activist and their hold-no-prisoners tactics. The cause celebre was nothing but a regular human being with his qualities and his flaws. The hero-vs-villain battle just became an old “what’s in there for me?” and this sums up the rental pool situation in SF.

            I have to assume this has to be less than a typical buyout. The Ellis stigma for the owner was there. The battle was lost if not for a silly technicality. When the writing is on the wall, time to move on. Kudos to the tenant for keeping his poker face.

        • Posted by parklife


          And do you consider someone who buys a building and evicts a tenant in order to live in the building to be a “real estate pig”?

          How about a landlord that has owned his/her building their entire life and would like to obtain a decent price for the building, is he/she a “real estate pig”.

          Or is anyone who challenges the implied lifetime lease at below inflation rent increases a “real estate pig”?

      • Posted by move

        I can only suggest to you what my so-called progressive friends tell me when I mention the street people that sell and do drugs in my neighborhood, “if you don’t like it here, move”. The US Constitution allows you the right to travel…perhaps Oakland has rents you would enjoy?

      • Posted by dB

        “Some create, others consume AND find things too expensive.”
        Fronzi, can I use that quote??
        But seriously, there’s room for so much more grey area, nuance even, than the either/or edict you’ve declared here. And it does sounds awfully self-aggrandizing to self-title as a “creator”, particularly in the context of house flipping and Ellis-acting in this town. Little in common with those “creatives” whose impact is noteworthy and memorable.

        In any event, I agree with Brahma with regard to his definition of a parasite below; Context is key.

        • Posted by san FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

          Sure, it all depends if you believe in capitalism and free markets. If you do, then you probably understand the need for market agents that will provoke price realization. Speculators, flippers, builders, etc: they all participate in a market that will transform inefficiencies into opportunities.

          Rent control is a major inefficiency, both economically and socially. The middle class young cannot move to SF because the old are hogging places they pay 25% of market value. The result is the squeezing out of the middle class from SF. “Some/Many” landlords are not getting the ROI they deserve for their risk and effort. They will not improve their property and delay needed maintenance, causing a drag on construction spending.

          Having rent controlled tenants calling people parasites is extremely hypocritical. Rent controlled tenants are feeding off a landlord, weakening this person until he throws up his arms and gives up. In many cases this means selling to someone who will spend the time and energy to clean up the situation. Someone that you call parasite, that I would call a cleaner. Someone who knows you have to get your hands dirty when the situation requires it. But from the passive tenant prospective, you cannot see that because you are still living like a fully grown up child.

  3. Posted by Bob

    Because we should amend state law because one small city just cannot manage its own housing requirements

  4. Posted by san FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

    I think these measures are just created to earn progressive street cred points.

    If supervisors were really concerned about making life easier for San Franciscans, they’d use their brains to solve the multiple issues that is plaguing SF today:
    – Ridiculously overpriced and undersized public transportation
    – Widespread homelessness
    – Bloated budget that can seem to balance only because we are very very lucky to have TECH in here

    But hey, we need to protect rent control, the insanely unjust law that doesn’t look who it punishes or rewards, because voters are hooked on the cheap rent.

  5. Posted by jill

    im sure he never thought it was pass. it was a ridiculous proposal

  6. Posted by SFrentier

    Cueing up Beck’s hit single right now as I read in delight…pa ba ba baba baaaaa…

    Things are gonna change, I can feel it

  7. Posted by SFrentier

    And now one from a different era-

    na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goodbye…

  8. Posted by A Real Estate Pig

    I’m so sick and tired of listening to all the whiners who washed up here (in SF) in the 90’s and feel they have the God given right to a lifetime Lease and a “job” at a City Supported non-profit.

    San Franciscans have been complaining since 1849 about “new People” moving here and driving up rents and prices.

    To all you whiners in your rent controlled apartments: Cry me a River-I have no sympathy for you.

    I am what some might call a “Real Estate Pig”. I’m a Realtor and work very hard for my clients, mostly older empty nesters, looking to sell and trade down. I’ve never Ellised a building nor have I ever evicted a residential tenant. Despite all that, in 2009-2011, there just were not that many sales and my income dried up.

    I was then forced to short sell my condo in 2011, loosing my $100K down-payment plus about $35K in improvements. Did I try to get public assistance, food stamps, whatever? NO. I found a job in Southern California for less than 1/4 of what I was making in 2008 and moved there. I lived simply, saved up and returned to San Francisco last Summer.

    Yes, being forced to move out of your home is painful, be it an Ellis Act Eviction, Foreclosure, Act of God or OMI. However whining is what small children do and it rarely works anyway.

    • Posted by san FronziScheme (formerly known as lol)

      Wow, sorry to hear from the short sale. I hope you got your loss back. What defines you is not how you make a win, but how you react after a loss. Kudos for the fighting spirit.

  9. Posted by Sfarchitect

    Good bye Leno.
    This was a stupid law – and would have meant more tenants got evicted just because owners would need to evict just to sell.
    Polititans like Leno, Avalos & Campos – have no real world reality and will hurt more tenants with their silly ideas.
    The Assembly was 99% full of small property owners – Leno doesn’t know what it is to save up, and buy a place and offer to housing to others – he only thinks he knows how to take it back. Leno we live in the USA not the USSR – and the rest of the state doesn’t care about San Francisco whiners.

  10. Posted by Keepitup

    Hey socket site……thanks for censoring my comments. Figures, considering your in SF.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *